*i^/ 



s^< 



ILIBIUHYOFCONGRESS.I 

Aap |°1«'>'J|" , ! 



\ ^/>e4 




* UNITED STATES OP AMERICA. | 



THE DOCTRINE 



OF 



THE LORD'S SUPPER, 

AS SET FORTH IN THE BOOK OF CONCORD, 

CEITICAllY EXAMINED, AND ITS PALLACY DEMONSTRATED. 






BY lOMj, 

7 REY. J. B. GROSS. 



" Kann die Walirheit vorerbt werden, wie irdischer Besitz ? Oder angezogen 
werden, wIq ein Gewand ?" 



PHILADELPHIA: 

J. B. LIPPINCOTT & CO. 

187 3. 



'J'Mfi LIBRARY 
or CONGRESS 

(WASHlNGTOKi 



f\ 



^-^^ 



Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year 1872, by 

J. B. LIPPINCOTT & CO., 
In the Office of the Librarian of Congress, at Washington. 



DEDIOATIOR 



That which is essential to the salvation of mankind must 
admit of being readily understood, and — if not easily, at least 
successfully — carried out, by all that have the gift of ordinary 
intelligence or common sense, and faithfully make use of the 
appointed means of grace, as set forth in the word of God : a 
qualification of which we must never lose sight. The idea 
that God has founded a system of redemption for the benefit 
of mankind which only priests or hierarchs — that is, men 
claiming to be especially authorized 'or Divinely appointed — 
can accurately understand and render intelligible to the rest 
of the human race, is preposterous, and at once an insult to 
God and an outrage against common sense. 

What mainly causes the Scriptures to be so often misun- 
derstood, or understood only with great labor and difficulty, 
is the extensively controlling influence which human creeds, 
or the exclusive doctrines of sectism, exercise over the 
human mind, which, thus warped and debased, is no longer 
competent to interpret the word of God agreeably to its true 
import or in conformity to common sense principles. Chris- 
tians at this moment, and in this nineteenth century of the 
Christian era, though they are not generally aware of the 
humiliating fact, are too frequently the followers of men in- 
stead of the Lord Jesus Christ ; of " the commandments of 
men," taught as saving truths, instead of the Divine teachings 

1* (v) 



vi DEDICATION. 

of the Gospel of the Son of God. Owing- to this criminal 
practice, this high-handed invasion of the rights of conscience, 
the Gospel of the Saviour is virtually superseded by man's 
devices, and the poor, deluded laity is often made to believe a 
myth instead of the Divine truth. This is sometimes done 
designedly for the good, as may be supposed, of plebeian 
souls ; but in the Protestant Church a practice so base must 
be presumed to be rare in proportion to the ascendency of 
liberal principles and the general diffusion of education. 

Much that the Bible teaches is not absolutely essential to 
salvation, but is to be regarded as adventitious, and designed 
only as a vehicle of instruction at the time to which it refers : 
as the wrapper in which the Gospel has been clothed and 
handed down to future ages. It is emphatically this unes- 
sential part of the Scriptures which especially claims the 
labors and requires the skill of the learned commentator, but 
which has no direct or vital bearing on the redemptive virtue 
of the Divine word. Christ's hearers were in an eminent de- 
gree the unlearned, the common people, or, in the touching 
phrase, "The lost sheep of the house of Israel"; but, unless 
he spoke in parables or in unusual figurative language, — 
which he at once explained and thus rendered intelligible, — 
his illiterate hearers understood him quite well ; and they 
even had the sagacity to compare his method of teaching 
with that of the Jewish rabbins, drawing the significant in- 
ference that " he taught them as one having authority, and 
not as the scribes": Matthew, vii. 29. 

But to render salvation certain there must surely be human 
creeds ? Oh, no : they are not at all necessary. Christ laid 
down no creed except that he is the Saviour: the Apostles 
professed no other creed but this ; and the Christian Church 
was content to abide by this creed till it began to grow cor- 
rupt. Sects only need creeds. Christians, not given to 
novelties, have creed enough in the Bible : this is the only 



DEDICATION. vii 

creed that is manifestly God-sanctioned. It is ample enough, 
and stringent enough ; yet it allows every one " to be con- 
vinced in his own mind." 

The Bible refers to man as co-agent with Christ in redemp- 
tion, and declares works and grace mutually and inseparably 
co-operative in the Christian life. The Bible and Bible- 
imbued common sense, therefore, are to be regarded as ex- 
clusively normative in matters of faith and holy living. Such 
being the plain and incontrovertible facts, as regards this 
most interesting and important subject, the opinions incul- 
cated in this paper are respectfully inscribed to the attention 
and prayers of the Friends and Advocates of biblical truth, 
and Gospel-enlightened and guided common sense,'* by 

The Author. 

* In a Sermon on the Reformation, the learned and devout Spencr, 
the introducer of Pietism into the dead routine of formalism of the 
Lutheran Church, in the latter part of the seventeenth century, 
writes thus : " Preachers are not to monopolize all proofs of doctrine 
to themselves, but to concede personal research to their hearers, who 
are not to be hindered, but advised and urged, diligently to read and 
study the Scriptures, that they may establish and strengthen their 
faith in the word of God." " Therefore," continues this eminent 
divine, "the Scripture is to be understood, not with blind submission 
to the commentators, but as each Christian, after diligent meditation 
■ and prayer, is convinced hy the Holy Ghost. Christian ministers too 
are delivered from the papistic yoke, so that, in our oflSce of teach- 
ing, so far as doctrine is concerned, we are hound by nothing hut the 
Holy Scriptures and the infallible toord of God, and may, with con- 
fident freedom, teach whatever we believe to be derived from it, and 
need, therefore, not ask whether a Pope or Council has authorized it." 
The following cognate sentiments are from the pen of Prof. Spre- 
cher, in a contribution to the Lutheran Observer of April 10, 1868, 
founded on the Life and Writings of Luther, by Walch, vol. v., p. 
326, and vol. vi., p. 182 : ** Comfort is to be found nowhere but in the 
Scriptures and God's word. We are to believe no Councils or Saints, 



Viii DEDICATION. 

except in as far as they agree with the word of God. We must re- 
main free judges, and have power to judge and decide, to receive and 
condemn, whatever the Pope establishes or the Councils determine." 
I will only add, that while I hail Prof. Sprecher's utterances in 
this connection with no less pleasure than gratitude, truth compels 
me to say that the liberal views now and then expressed by Luther 
were often flatly contradicted by their illustrious author, especially 
in his obstinate defense of the dogma of the Real Presence. 



TABLE OF COE"TEIfTS. 



PAGE 

Dedication v 

Introduction 13 

SECTION I. 
Take, eat; this is my Body 19 

CHAPTER I. 

The Language in which Christ administered the Lord's Supper.. 19 

CHAPTER IL 
The Hebrews use the Substantive Verb to he, in the Sense im- 
plying to signify, represent, denote, etc 22 

CHAPTER IIL 
This is my Body 27 

CHAPTER IV. 
Consubstantiation or Impanation 32 

CHAPTER V. 
Collateral Scripture Texts,, claimed in Support of a Real Presence, 
examined, and their Inapplicability set forth 89 

CHAPTER VL 

The Doctrine of the Real Presence comes under the Category of 
Sensitive Knowledge, and therefore its Truth or Fallacy may 
be tested 45 

(ix) 



X TABLE OF CONTENTS. 



CHAPTER VII. 

PAGE 

In which will be shown why so much stress is laid upon the 
Doctrine of the Real Presence, while its Untenableness and 
Dangerous Tendency are pointed out 52 

CHAPTER VIII. 

The Body and Blood of Christ were only Accessories, not Prin- 
cipals, in the Accomplishment of Redemption 68 

CHAPTER IX. 
The Ubiquity or Omnipresence of Christ's Body 62 

PARAGRAPH I. 

The Ubiquity or Omnipresence of Christ's Terrestrial Body 62 

PARAGRAPH II. 

The Ubiquity or Omnipresence of Christ's Glorified Body 68 

PARAGRAPH III. 

Christ sits on the Right Hand of God, and, therefore, his Glorified 
Body must, say the Advocates of a Real Presence, possess 
Ubiquity 73 

SECTION II. 
The Lord's Supper is a Memorial 77 

CHAPTER I. 
Christ our Passover 77 

CHAPTER II. 
Christ, the Founder of the New Testament 84 

SECTION III. 

The Lord's Supper, beside being a Commemorative Ordinance, 
is also a Means of Grace 91 



TABLE OF CONTENTS. xi 

SECTION IV. 

PAGE 

The Use of Blood, as Food, is forbidden in Scripture, and can- 
not, therefore, constitute a part of the Real Presence 96 

CHAPTER I. 
Its Prohibition in the Old Testament 96 

CHAPTER II. 
Its Prohibition in the New Testament 99 

SECTION Y. 

The Apostolic Decree, Acts, xv. 1-29, prohibiting the Use of 
Blood, as an Article of Food, is still in Force 103 

SECTION YI. 

The Discourse of the Saviour, in John, vi. 32-63, impartially 
examined, and illustrated with Direct Reference to the Doc- 
trine of the Real Presence in the Lord's Supper 110 

SECTION YII. 

The Doctrine of the Real Presence, in the Lord's Supper, must 
be, forever, retained ; for the Book of Concord, of which it forms 
a Faxt, is required to be subscribed 121 

CHAPTER L 
Students and Ministers, at present received into the German 
Evangelical Lutheran Ministerium of Pennsylvania and Ad- 
jacent States, are obliged to subscribe all the Symbolical Books 
or Confessions of Faith 121 

CHAPTER IL 
By Subscription to an Unalterable Creed, Progress in Religious 
Knowledge is stayed, and Violence done to Conscience 125 

SECTION YIII. 

The Bible, not Man or Human Dictation, is the only Authority 
in Faith and Christian Life : a Principle of Interpretation 
which, in the Present Light of Exegesis, must prove Fatal to 
the Dogma of the Real Presence 132 



xii TABLE OF CONTENTS. 

SECTION IX. 

PAGE 

Creeds are Necessary only where there are Sects, but Sectarian- 
ism is forbidden, 1 Corinthians, i. 10-13 ; iii. 3-11, therefore 
Creeds are forbidden. This being the case, the Dogma of the 
Ileal Presence occupies Forbidden Ground, and is itself, of 
course, — as Human Prescription, — forbidden 143 

SECTION X. 

Some of the Dogmas of the Lutheran Church hare fallen into 
Desuetude : a Fact which encourages the Hope that the Doc- 
trine of the Real Presence may, eventually, meet with a Simi- 
lar Fate ; but in the meanwhile, the Venerable Parent of Prot- 
estantism may, in Some Measure, justly claim Superiority of 
Practice over Theory 156 

CHAPTER I. 
Immersion, in Theory, is a Lutheran Mode of Baptism ; in Prac- 
tice, it is notobserved 156 

CHAPTER XL 
Auricular Confession appears among the Articles of Faith in the 
Book of Concord, but is, at least in this Country, not observed. 161 

CHAPTER in. 
The Mass, or the Roman Catholic Ritual-Service of the Lord's 
Supper 167 

SECTION XI. 

The Doctrine of the Real Presence, in the Lord's Supper, was the 
Cause of Some Trouble in the Early Lutheran Church. The 
Source of this Trouble — Want of Religious Toleration 176 

SECTION XII. 
The Appeal in Behalf of the Bible and of Our Country 189 



THE DOCTRINE 



THE LORD'S SUPPER. 



INTRODUCTION. 

YiEWED from a Roman Catholic standpoint, the 
Reformation of the sixteenth century was simply a 
ridiculous presumption, which ended in a criminal 
apostasy ; whereas, regarded according to the aim and 
spirit of Protestantism, it was a glorious revival of 
pristine Christianity, distinguished at once for the 
vastness of its extent and the grandeur of its results. 
From it is derived a new and improved order of things, 
expressed in the social and intellectual amelioration of 
Protestant life, and it, therefore, constitutes a pleasing 
and prominent epoch in the history of mankind. How- 
ever, with the exception of the religious element, which 
pre-eminently distinguished this arduous and noble 
enterprise, the good that resulted from it was rather 
incidental than designed. Its aim and efforts were of 
a decidedly negative character : repudiation and an- 
tagonism prominently marked and illustrated its lofty 

2 (13) 



14 TEE DOCTRINE OF 

career, while it was mainly content with hurling just 
criminations against its wily and puissant foe, or with 
resolutely uttering protestations, significant of stern 
dissent or bold defiance. The ruling sentiment, which 
prompted its measures and guided its actions, was the 
decided conviction that the Roman Catholic Church 
was most palpably and lamentably corrupt, and that, 
consequently, it stood in most urgent need of a speedy 
and thorough purgation from its inherent and mani- 
fold contaminations. Such a course, it was claimed, 
was loudly and absolutely -demanded as an essential, 
and, therefore, indispensable condition of the success 
and perpetuity of Christianity itself. In short, the 
Reformers strove to restore the gospel to its apostolic 
integrity, or, in other words, to rescue " the Ark of 
the Covenant" from the unclean and idolatrous hands 
of the papal Philistines. 

To this destructive principle — everywhere revealing 
itself in acts of probing and excision, which animated 
the zeal and directed the energy of the Reformers with 
a praiseworthy and invincible resolution, in regard to 
the devices, the abuses, and the corruptions of the 
Roman hierarchy, and its despotic encroachments upon 
the inalienable rights of the individual — it was chiefly 
owing that civil and religious liberty, after a prolonged 
as well as profound burial of ages, again revived, and 
that, wherever the spirit of true Protestantism exists, 
these twin sisters of a higher civilization and a more 
refined humanity are justly included among the chief 
blessings, as well as accounted the pride and glory, of 
the human race. 



THE LORD'S SUPPER. 15 

As to Scripture exegesis, the Reformation may 
justly be presumed not to have exhausted the science, 
and a thorough biblical knowledge is, therefore, by no 
means under an exclusive or even a very distinguished 
obligation to the Reformers. Of the laws of herme- 
neutics, of the science of sacred philology, anthro- 
pology, biblical criticism, etc., they could have but 
very inadequate knowledge, indeed mere rudimental 
conceptions. What, for example, in the pages of 
Scripture, is of mere local import, or restricted to 
national boundaries only, they — without scruple or 
misgiving, it seems — applied universally, and the letter 
or flesh that profiteth nothing or killeth, had often, 
alas ! more weight with them than the spirit that 
quickeneth ; and hence it must be conceded that, in 
consequence of such vitiating literalism, they lacked, 
to a less or greater extent, the first requisites of a cor- 
rect interpretation of the Divine oracles. 

The Reformers generally were unable to push their 
efforts further in the attempted religious metamor- 
phosis than to the chrysalis state, where they settled 
down in permanent fixation, and hence the various 
Protestant creeds are as unalterable as the laws of the 
Modes and the Persians ! 

A fundamental error in exegesis which, more or 
less, distinguishes all Protestant creeds, is the want of 
discrimination between ethical works and the ritualistic 
works of the Levitical law, and the consequent lapse 
into Antinomianism, or rejection of spontaneous human 
agency in the plan of redemption. In short, without 
in the least wishing to undervalue the important ser- 



16 THE DOCTRINE OF 

vices which they have rendered to mankind, or to 
ij^nore their eminently Divine mission, candor obliges 
me to confess that their task was accomplished in 
ushering in the dawn of moral and intellectual regen- 
eration, while to future ages was left the glory of dis- 
playing a noonday light, reflecting and illustrating the 
labors and researches of a constantly progressive and 
expanding religious development. 

The sequel will show that the reformation of a cor- 
rupt Church, and a thoroughly intelligent appreciation 
of Christianity, cannot be achieved in the brief space 
of a single generation, especially when we reflect that 
the knowledge of the Reformers chiefly comprised 
scholastic learning, while, at the same time, their 
minds were warped by the prejudices of a bigoted and 
servile education, thw^artei in its nobler aspirations by 
groveling monachism on the one hand, and hierarchical 
tyranny on the other. 

Nothing, I make bold to say, so clearly demonstrates 
at least an exceptional incompetence of the exegesis of 
Luther and his ostensibly more 7^igid followers, recog- 
nized — with a view to party distinction — as the Sym- 
bolical Lutherans, to a correct interpretation of the 
Scriptures, as the dogma of the Lord's Supper, as 
taught in the Book of Concord, or the pernicious 
influence which Romanism still exercised over the 
awakening intellect of the Reformers. Notw^ith stand- 
ing their firm determination boldly to battle for the 
right as they understood it, they deprecated a final 
rupture with the papacy. Hence their reformation 
could not but fail to be thorough, while their secession 



THE LORD'S SUPPER. 17 

from its polluted pale was rather partial than complete. 
Ultramontanism never ceased to cast its Upas shadow 
over the Evangelical Churches. And though transub- 
stantiation was deservedly condemned as a flagrant 
perversion of the eucharistic institution, as well as a 
heinous abuse of the expiatory sacrifice of Christ, yet 
restoration to its original use and true import could be 
carried no further than to consuhstantiation ! Here 
the noble ship of this branch of the Reformation came 
near stranding, and Luther, together with those who 
shared his excessive sacramental views, for the present 
cast anchor, while Rome, erst full of hate and just 
apprehension for the future, looked on with evident 
complacency; smiled, and apparently triumphed: it 
was a monstrous Siamese-twin like connection between 
the Vatican and Wittenberg, which the future only 
could sever I 

And shall the nineteenth century halt in its biblical 
researches, where, more than three centuries and a half 
ago, the Reformers halted ? Is it wise, is it safe, to 
do so ? Is religious progress interdicted in the word 
of God ? Or is the God-given reason of the many to 
be only the plaything of the aspiring few? Can 
Luther, or Zwinglius, or Calvin answer for the rest of 
mankind at the- bar of the Almighty? Or is not, on 
the contrary, every one held personally and solemnly 
responsible to his Creator for his faith and conduct ? 
Nothing, I conceive, is more evident to the unsophis- 
ticated mind than that every one, as far as it is possi- 
ble, must individually search the Scriptures, or, at 
least, found his convictions of Christian duty upon his 



18 THE DOCTRINE OF 

own unbiased judgment, and his watchword must, 
therefore, ever be, Onward and upward! 

St. Paul avers that " the word of God is not bound," 
2 Timothy ii. 9; while he solemulj urges every one, 
to " prove all things," and to " hold fast that which is 
good," 1 Thess. v. 21. It is the undoubted birthright 
of every one to embrace that creed only which he 
finds scriptural and reasonable, and to which he can 
give his hearty approval, while human dogmas at 
variance with Scripture or the plain dictates of com- 
mon sense, though sanctioned or enjoined by great 
names or high ecclesiastical authority, must be always, 
peremptorily and forever, rejected as inimical to the 
best interests of men, or as snares most baneful to the 
soul. 

Though sometimes carried away by passion or 
warped by prejudice, Luther was, by no means, devoid 
of liberal sentiments or generous emotions, as the fol- 
lowing pithy sayings, among numerous others, will 
testify: "Man soil gewissenhaft seyn," and, "Es ist 
um den Glauben ein eigenes Ding, woran man Nie- 
manden kriinken miisse." 

Eastox, Pa., August, 1872. 



THE LORD'S SUPPER. 



SIBOTIOl^sr I. 
TAKE, EAT; THIS IS MY BODY, 



C H A P T E R I. 

The Language in which Christ administered the Lord's Supper. 

Though the Greek language was to some extent 
known and spoken in Palestine at the time of Christ 
and his Apostles, it was by no means the vernacular 
vehicle of communication, and the great majority of 
the people was as unaccustomed to its use as it was 
unconscious of its necessity. 

According to the distinguished biblical scholar, 
Michaelis, in his " Einleitung in die gottlichen Schriften 
des Neuen Bundes," the original language of the Jews 
was the Hebrew, but after their return from the Baby- 
lonian captivity, this language became so far obsolete 
as to be retained only in the solemnities of Divine wor- 
ship,* and to be cultivated exclusively by the learned 
as a dead language, while the Aramaic — the Syro- 
Chaldaic language — took its place, and became the 

* To render it intelligible to the people, it was necessary to trans- 
late it into Chaldee. 



20 TEE DOCTRINE OF 

common vehicle of communication. He adds : " The 
Hebrew language, whether employed or simply re- 
ferred to by Philo and the writers of the New Testa- 
ment, denotes not the proper, original language of that 
name, but what is emphatically recognized as the 
Ghaldaic.'' 

What the candid and erudite Dr. Clarke writes in 
reference to this subject, in his Commentary on the 
New Testament, essentially agrees with the foregoing 
statements. Referring to the words of the institution 
of the Lord's Supper, he thus expresses himself: 
" That our Lord neither spoke in Greek nor in Latin, 
on this occasion, needs no proof. It was, most prob- 
ably, in what was formerly called the Chaldaic, now 
the Syriac, that our Lord conversed with his disciples. 
Through the providence of God, we have complete 
versions of the gospels in this language ; and in them, 
it is likely, we have the precise words spoken by our 
Lord on this occasion. In Matthew, xxvi. 26, 2T, the 
words in the Syriac version are haiiau pagi^ee, this is my 
body, hanau demee, this is my blood, of which forms 
of speech the Greek is a verbal translation ; nor would 
any man, even in the present day, speaking in the 
same language, use, among the people to whom it was 
vernacular, other terms but the above to express, This 
rejjresents my body, and this represents my blood." 

In this connection, it is proper to state that, in trans- 
mitting to us an account of the gospel in the Greek 
language, the writers of the New Testament retained 
the idiomatic peculiarities of the original Aramaic or 
Syriac language, habitually spoken by the Saviour, 



THE LORD'S SUPPER. 21 

and in which he proclaimed the momentous truths of 
redemption. This idiomatic peculiarity, or remarkable 
linguistic structure, consists pre-eminently in the iigu- 
rative modes of expression, common to the Shemitic 
languages, of which the Aramaic or Chaldeo-Syriac 
constitutes an important branch. 

Much stress has been laid upon the words, "■ Hoc 
est corpus meum," this is my body, contained in the 
Yulgate version of the Bible, as if the original of the 
three evangelists had been written in the Latin lan- 
guage. ** Had our Lord spoken in Latin, following 
the idiom of the Yulgate," says the commentator 
already quoted, " he would have said, 'Pauls hie cor- 
pus meum significat,' or ' symbolum est corporis mei'; 
'hoc poculum sanguinem meum representat,' or 'sym- 
bolum est sanguinis mei' : this bread signifies my 
body, or is a symbol of my body ; this cup represents 
my blood, or is the symbol of my blood. But let it be 
observed, that in the Hebrew, Chaldee, and Chaldeo- 
Syriac languages, there is no term which expresses to 
mean, signify, denote, though both the Greek and Latin 
abound with them : hence the Hebrews use a figure 
and say, it is, for it signifies.''^^ 



*The learned Doctor Prideaux, in his valuable work entitled "The 
Old and New Testaments, connected in the History of the Jews and 
Neighboring Nations," etc., after some preliminary remarks in eluci- 
dation of this subject, writes thus: "In truth the Syriac and the 
Chaldee are one and the same language in different characters, and 
differing a little only in dialect." Having observed in the sequel 
that the Jerusalem Chaldee dialect is the Chaldee dialect intermixed 
with the Hebrew, he adds : " The Jerusalem Chaldee dialect is the 



22 THE DOCTRINE OF 



CHAPTER II. 

The Hebrews use the substantive verb to he in the sense implying to 
signify, represent, denote, etc. 

It is this pre-eminently tropical or figurative char- 
acter of the Chaldeo-Sjriac language that so promi- 
nently distinguishes it from the Greek and Latin lan- 
guages, which though sharing this tropical peculiarity 
to a moderate extent, especially abound in terms ex- 
pressive of likeness, indication, memento, denotation, 
symbol, representation, etc. ; and thus this indicative 
trait, this sign or token-intimation, this index-utterance 
or oral signation, in these languages, is what consti- 
tutes a most striking difference between the Occidental 
and the Oriental idioms of expression.* 

same which was the vulgar language of the Jews in our Saviour^s 
time." In Milman's interesting "History of the Jews," I find the 
following narration of facts: "At Rome, Joscphus first wrote the 
history of the Jewish war in the Syro-Chaldaic language for the use 
of his own countrymen in the East, particularly those beyond the 
Euphrates. He afterwards translated the work into Greek for the 
benefit of the Western Jews and of the Romans." To expatiate is 
unnecessary. 

* The gist of this matter may, it appears, be briefly summed up 
thus: The Greek and Latin languages employ the verb to be some- 
times in a tropical sense, while its usual import is literal ; on the other 
hand, in the Shemitic languages, this verb is comparatively much 
more frequently used in a figurative sense. The chief peculiarity, 
however, of these languages, according to Oriental scholars, is that 
they do not contain any words which express signify, denote, or rep- 
resent, etc. 



THE LORD'S SUPPER. 23 

I shall now proceed to exemplify the proposition 
proclaimed in the heading of this chapter, or, in other 
words, to demonstrate, by numerous and striking pas- 
sages of Scripture, that the verb to he, in the Aramaic 
or Chaldeo-Syriac language, is not only used figura- 
tively, but that, in many instances, it absolutely can- 
not be used in any other way. Illustrations derived 
from the Old Testament will first claim our attention : 
The three branches are three days, Genesis, xl. 12 ; 
the three baskets are three days. Genesis, xl. 18; the 
seven kine are seven years. Genesis, xli. 26, 27 ; the 
seven ears are seven years, Genesis, xli. 26, 2*7; ye 
shall eat it — the paschal lamb — in haste, for it is the 
Lord's passover, Exodus, xii. 11 ; unleavened bread, 
at the Jewish passover celebration, was the bread of 
affliction, Deuteronomy, xvi. 3 ; God is the rock of 
salvation, Deuteronomy, xxxii. 15; the Lord is my 
rock and my fortress, 2 Samuel, xxii. 2 : the same 
phraseology occurs in Psalm xviii. 2 ; he — behemoth 
— is the chief of the ways of God, Job, xl. 19 ; he — 
leviathan — is a king over all the children of pride, 
Job, xli. 34 ; the Lord is my buckler, the horn of my 
salvation, my high tower. Psalm xviii. 2; the Lord is 
my shepherd. Psalm xxiii. 1 ; the Lord is a sun and 
shield. Psalm Ixxxiv. 11 ; the vineyard of the Lord of 
hosts is the house of Israel, Isaiah, v. T ; the ancient 
and honorable, he is the head ; and the prophet that 
teaches lies, he is the tail, Isaiah, ix. 15 ; Israel is a 
scattered sheep, Jeremiah, 1. IT; this city is the cal- 
dron, Ezekiel, xi. 3 ; thy elder sister is Samaria, and 
thy younger sister is Sodom, etc., Ezekiel, xvi. 46 ; 



24 THE DOCTRINE OF 

many isles icere the merchandise of thine hand, Eze- 
kiel,xxvii. 15 ; Judah and the land of Israel, ihQjwere 
thy mercliants, Ezekiel, xxvii. It ; these great beasts, 
which are four, are four kings, which shall arise out of 
the earth, Daniel, vii. 1*7 ; and the ten horns out of this 
kingdom ai^e ten kings that shall arise, Daniel vii. 24; 
the two horns of the ram which thou sawest, are the 
kings of Media and Persia, Daniel, viii. 20; the rough 
goat is the king of G-recia, etc., Daniel, viii. 21 ; the 
prophet is a snare of a fowler in all his ways, etc., Ho- 
sea, ix. 8 ; a nation is come up upon my land, strong 
and without number, whose teeth are the teeth of a 
lion, etc., Joel, i. G ; prophecy not again any more at 
Bethel, for it is the king's chapel, and it is the king's 
court, Amos,- vii. 13 ; the Lord is a strong-hold in the 
day of trouble, Xahum, i. 7 ; the four carpenters are 
the horns which have scattered Judah, etc., Zechariah, 
i. 20, 21 ; the seven lamps are the eyes of the Lord, 
Zechariah, iv. 2, 10 ; the horses of the four chariots 
are the four spirits of the heavens, Zechariah, vi. 1-5, 
etc. In all these passages, no one of ordinary intelli- 
gence and candor will fail to recognize in the words 
is, are, were, etc., the sense importing to signify, 
mean, represent, denote, symbolize, etc., and to ac- 
knowledge that the phrases in which these different 
tenses and numbers of the verb to he occur, are 
strictly parallel with the words in the Lord's Supper, 
upon which the dogma of the Real Presence has been 
based. 

I shall next invite attention to the pages of the Xew 
Teslainent for examples of figurative modes of expres- 



THE LORD'S SUPPER. 25 

sion, common, in the use of the substantive verb to he, 
in the Aramaic or Chaldeo-Syriac language, and, of 
course, by following a literal translation, reproduced 
both in the Greek text and the versions which have 
been derived from it : Ye are the salt of the earth, 
Matthew, v. 13; ye are the light of the world, Mat- 
thew, V. 14; this — John the Baptist — is Elias who 
was to come, Matthew, xi. 14. Adverting now to our 
Lord's exposition of the Parable of the Good Seed and 
the Tares, recorded in the thirteenth chapter of Mat- 
thew, we shall find that it will readily supply us with 
a mass of fresh and overwhelming proofs in behalf of 
the figurative character of the Aramaic language, trans- 
mitted to us in the sacred pages of the Bible, which are 
so thoroughly imbued with this remarkable linguistic 
feature. The disciples, not fully understanding its im- 
port, asked for an interpretation of the parable, and 
Jesus replied : He that soweth the good seed is the 
Son of man ; the field is the world ; the good seed 
are the children of the kingdom ; the tares are the 
children of the wicked one ; the enemy that sowed 
them is the devil ; the harvest is the end of the world ; 
the reapers are the angels. Besides this, we read : Be- 
hold the Lamb of God, that taketh away the sin of the 
world, — that is, behold Christ, who is the Lamb of God, 
John, i. 29 ; John the Baptist was a burning and a 
shining light, John, v. 35 ; the bread of God is he that 
Cometh down from heaven, and giveth life unto the 
world, John, vi. 33; I am the bread of life, John, 
vi. 48; I am the living bread that came down from 
heaven, etc., John, vi. 51 ; I am the door of the sheep, 

3 



26 THE DOCTRINE OF 

John, X. Y, 9 ; I am the good shepherd, John, x. 11, 
14; I said, Ye are gods, John x. 34 ; I am the way, 
and the truth, and the life, John, xiv. 6; I am the true 
vine, John, xv. 1 ; my Father is the husbandman, 
John, X7. 1 ; I am the vine, 3^e are the branches, John, 
XV. 5 ; they drank of that spiritual rock that followed 
them, and that rock was Christ, 1 Corinthians, x. 4 ; 
these — the two sons of Abraham — are the two cove- 
nants, Galatians, iv. 24 ; this Hagar is Mount Sinai, 
etc., Galatians, iv. 25 ; Jerusalem that is above, etc., is 
the mother of us all, Galatians, iv. 26 ; this is the blood 
of the testament which God has enjoined unto you, 
Hebrews, ix. 20 ; the seven stars are the angels of the 
seven churches, Kevelation, i. 20 ; the seven candle- 
sticks which thou sawcst are the seven churches. Rev- 
elation, i. 20 ; and in the midst of the elders stood a 
Lamb as it had been slain, having seven horns and 
seven eyes, which are the seven spirits of God sent 
forth into all the earth. Revelation, v. 6 ; and the 
woman that thou sawcst is that great city, etc., Reve- 
lation, xvii. 18, etc. 

To adduce more evidence upon this subject, a task 
by no means either difficult or ineffective, -would, it 
seems, be a mockery of common sense, and clearly 
trifling with the admitted usus loquendi of mankind. 
Our Lord himself, as we have seen, indorses the figu- 
rative use of the verb to he in numerous and most 
emphatic passages in the New Testament, as the pre- 
ceding quotations clearly and satisfactorily show, and 
if he is not decisive authority on this subject, how is it 
l)Ossible for my old Symbolistic friends of the Lutheran 



THE LORD'S SUPPER. 27 

Church to be? ''Learn of me," admonishes the Sa- 
viour, Matthew, xi. 29.* 



CHAPTER III. 

This is My Body. 

After the many and forcible examples in the pre- 
ceding chapter, of the eminently figurative sense of 
the verb to he, in its diiferent modes, candid minds, 
unwarped by prejudice, untrammeled by superstition, 

* The Lutheranism embraced in the Book of Concord, and includ- 
ing the three CEcumenical symbols, — as the Apostolic, the Nicene, 
and the Athanasian, — the Augsburg Confession, the Apology of the 
Augsburg Confession, and the Articles of Schmalkald, Luther's 
Larger and Smaller Catechisms, the Form of Concord, etc., is recog- 
nized under the appellations of Symbolism, Symbolic Lutheranism, Old 
Luthei-anism, etc., and the professors of this ample and somewhat 
rigid creed are known as the Symbolist, or Symbolic Lutherans, the 
Old Lutherans, etc. These descriptive epithets imply not reproach, 
but simply express denominational distinction. In this country, the 
General Council Lutherans rank under the preceding categories, to 
which also most emphatically are to be referred the Missouri branch 
of Lutherans. Of these General Council Lutherans I may remark, 
that the "German Evangelical-Lutheran Ministerium of Pennsyl- 
vania and Adjacent States" occupies a most prominent position, and 
that, in the prosecution of this Work, I shall not readily lose sight of 
this venerable body. 

It is to be observed, too, in this place, that Old Lutheranism, Sym- 
bolical Lutheranism, etc., is pre-eminently distinguished for the in- 
flexible tenacity with which it adheres to the dogma of the Real 
Presence in the Lord's Supper. 



28 THE DOCTRINE OF 

and therefore open to conviction, must be satisfied that 
the phrase, This is my body, means this signifies, rep- 
7'esents, or is a symbol, etc., of my body. But we 
have besides abundant proof that it is not to be taken 
literally, and that, therefore, to construe it literally is, 
in fact, to undermine the very foundation of Chris- 
tianity, as it is generally understood and set forth 
among orthodox denominations of Christians. 

When Jesus instituted the Lord's Supper, he took 
bread, — unleavened bread, the Jewish Matze, used at 
the celebration of the paschal feast, — and having broken 
it and given thanks, he turned to the disciples and 
said. Take, eat ; this is my body. How, I am curious 
to know, could he preserve his proper, incarnate iden- 
tity inviolate, and, at the same time, give his body to 
be eaten by his disciples ? Where was the Son of God 
while the Son of man was sacramcntally consumed ? 
He could no longer be present at all, on the occasion, 
in tlie capacity of a Saviour; for as such he carried on 
the work of redemption, not only as spirit, but as body 
and spirit, divinity and humanity in unity. Reaching 
the bread to the distinguished communicants, he said, 
Take, cat; this — this broken bread, is — means, my 
body, which is to be broken for you, his own body 
being then still alive or unbroken, and participating in 
all the solemn rites of a most impressive and eventful 
transaction. Notwithstanding all this, we are naively 
told that Christ distributed his own body to his dis- 
ciples. And yet the disciples who, on other occasions, 
involving less obscurity and incomprehensibleness, 
readily enough asked for explanations, on this occasion 



TEE LORD'S SUPPER. 29 

Dever express, or, as far as can be judged, even inti- 
mate, the least surprise at this unparalleled and de- 
cidedly unique transaction ! Being present at the time 
of the delivery, in strongly figurative language, of the 
Saviour's discourse, in John, vi. 33-63, they thought 
a literal interpretation of it only could be designed by 
the Divine orator, and therefore, not being able to re- 
concile it with the tenor of previous instruction, their 
past experience, or plain common sense, their aston- 
ishment found expression in the words, " This is a 
hard saying; who can hear it?" Sensible that ''the 
letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life," Jesus kindly 
hastened to relieve them of their embarrassment, in 
proclaiming the emphatic and memorable words : " It 
is the spirit thatquickeneth ; the flesh profiteth nothing, 
the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and 
they are life." But, to revert, how can bread, baked 
dough, and a human body be thus grossly and gro- 
tesquely confounded, on any recognized principle of 
sound ratiocination? Christ said. Take, eat; this is 
my body, which is given for you. Did he give his 
own body, or, in other words, himself, on the cross, 
for the sins of the world, or did he give the bread in 
the Lord's Supper, the Jewish Maize, for a sin-offering 
in a house in the city of Jerusalem ? Matthew, xxvi. 
18. If the sacramental bread is our expiatory sacri- 
fice, then the inference is inevitable that Christ suffered 
and died in vain I St. Paul writes in 1 Corinthians, 
xi. 24, in virtue of an express revelation on this inter- 
esting and important subject, that our Lord, in dis- 
tributing the bread, said. Take, eat ; this is my body, 

3* 



30 THE DOCTRINE OF 

■which is hroken for you : is hrohen for you is ca pro- 
lepsis, denoting the future in the present. Can any- 
thing be more clear than the apostolic teaching here, 
that the phrase, " which is broken for you," imports 
that Christ, not the bread, was broken, and thus made 
redemption for us on the cross, and that the breaking 
of the bread was merely to symbolize the manner of his 
death ? 

According to Matthew, xxvi. 29, and Mark, xiv. 25, 
it appears eminently plausible that our Lord partook 
of the sacramental supper, in common with his dis- 
ciples, on the memorable night of its institution. For 
after its celebration was concluded, he is represented 
as making this remarkable declaration: "But I say 
unto you, I will not drink henceforth of this fruit of 
the vine, until that day when I drink \ianew with you 
in my Father's kingdom." I have not the slightest 
doubt that he ate and drank with his chosen disciples 
on this momentous occasion, pregnant with the germs 
of a great and glorious moral and intellectual regen- 
eration. Now, if the eucharistic bread is the body of 
Christ, Christ ate his own body, ate himself! Saturn, 
we are taught in heathen nn'tbology, only devoured 
his children, but the sticklers for sacramental literal- 
ism, inconsiderately, to say the least, charge the im- 
maculate Saviour of mankind with the extraordinary 
feat of devouring himself I A phenomenon without 
parallel in the science of biology.* 

» The Lord's Supper is the banquet of sacred fellowship, the 
public token of Christian brotherhood, united in a common interest, 
and devoted to a common destiny, and hence it »Fas eminently 



THE LORD'S SUPPER. 31 

What is said of the bread, in the Lord's Supper, 
holds equally good in its application to the wine, the 
other species or element in the Sacrament. Jesus, in 
the words of the institution, calls the wine the blood 
of the New Testament, " which is shed for many for 
the remission of sins." Here again, I ask, was the 
wine, or the blood of Jesus, shed for the remission of 
sins ? If the wine could not, on any common sense 
principle, have had a direct agency in man's redemp- 
tion, it follows that it must have been simply employed 
as an emblem or sign, on account of its red, sanguine 
color, of the vicariously-shed blood of Jesus. In 
short, if bread and wine could have made expiation 
for the sins of mankind, neither the incarnation nor 
the crucifixion of the Son of God would, I conceive, 
have been necessary ; for an object that may be accom- 
plished with inferior means, of course supersedes the 
need of greater. 

proper that Jesus, as the author of the mnemonic institution, should 
participate in its enjoyment, as well as preside over its distribution, 
— eat and drink with the elite of his Christian household before his 
death, and thus, once more, by his earnest manner and holy conver- 
sation, solemnly and abidingly impress the sacredness of their great 
and responsible mission upon their susceptible and attentive minds. 



32 THE DOCTRINE OF 

CHAPTER lY. 

Consubstantiation or Impanation. 

CoNSUBSTANTiATiON, with wliich impaiiation mainly 
agrees in signification, means the union of the body 
— and blood too, of course, as a constituent part of the 
body — of the Saviour, with the sacramental elements. 
The origin of the dogma dates back to the twelfth cen- 
tury of the Christian Churcli, and claims one Rupert 
of Duytz for its author, who proposed it as a modifica- 
tion of transubstantiation. The Symbolists or Old 
Lutherans deny that their creed teaches consubstantia- 
tion ; but, notwithstanding, though the term may not 
appear in their dogma of the Lord's Supper, the fact, 
I conceive, is patent, and stands out in bold relief. 

According to the Book of Concord, the true body 
and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ are really present 
under the form or external signs of bread and wine, 
distributed to the communicants, and thus, under the 
insignia of bread and wine, received by them. We 
are likewise taught in the Schmalkald Articles that 
the bread and wine in the Lord's Supper are the true 
or real body and blood of Christ ; and in the Smaller 
Catechism the same doctrine is reiterated, and incul- 
cated with equal force and assurance. In the Larger 
Catechism, the great Reformer again teaches, "That 
in and under the bread and wine are contained the 



THE LORD'S SUPPER. 33 

real body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ." As 
to the Form of Concord, it lays down the somewhat 
startling proposition; that the eating and drinking of the 
bread and wine in the Lord's Supper are a veritable 
eating and drinking of the body and blood of our Lord 
in the Sacrament ; yet, after all, that it is a spiritual 
and supernatural eating and drinking, and, therefore, 
incomprehensible I 

According to the article on Church Yisitation, in the 
Book of Concord, there are two substances in the Lord's 
Supper, — the terrestrial, or bread and wine, and the 
celestial, or the body and blood of Christ, and we not 
only receive the body and blood of Christ spiritually, 
like other evangelical gifts, but oy^ally, or with the 
mouth,* with the bread and wine, though not in a Caper- 
naitic or carnal, but in a supernatural and spiritual, yet 
incomprehensible, manner. Besides, agreeably to the 
same authority, the body and blood that we thus re- 
ceive sacramentally, are the real, substantial body that 
hung on the cross, and the real, genuine blood that was 
shed for us in the great sacrifice. Finally, we find 
within the ample limits of the variform and elaborate 
creed of the Book of Concord, that the body and blood of 
Christ are not locally — localiter — confined to the bread 
and wine, and that they are only present during the 
communion solemnities. Though this last sentence 
softens a little the gross tenets of concorporation, ad- 
vanced in the dogma of the Keal Presence, synonymous 
with impanation or consubstantiation, it cannot nullify 

* It is technically an oralis manducatio. 



34 THE DOCTRINE OF 

the proposition that the body and blood of Christ are 
in and under the bread and wine, and, therefore, locally 
confined, or the fact that the communicants, receiving 
the body and blood of Christ, under the external signs of 
bread and wine, confine them, at least for a season, to 
the oral process of mastication and incipient digestion. 
A doctrine that is encumbered and distorted with 
traits at once so astounding and mysterious, absolutely 
in the opinion of many involving blasphemy, is un- 
doubtedly deserving the severest animadversion. 

Is consecration instrumental in producing impanation 
or consubstantiation, — that is, the Real Presence of 
Christ's material body and blood with the elements of 
bread and wine in the Lord's Supper ? I answer, No, 
and proceed to advance the necessary proofs. If by 
consecration is meant setting apart the sacramental ele- 
ments, bread and wine, for holy or religious purposes, 
— I admit the applicability of the term to the liturgic 
service, employed on the occasion of the institution of 
the Lord's Supper ; but if by it the idea is designed to 
be conveyed that a metamorphosis or transmutation of 
the elements into the body and blood of Christ is pro- 
duced, or that consubstantiation of the latter with the 
former is effected, then I deny that Christ used a rite of 
consecration at the solemn institution of theeucharistic 
Sacrament. But what do we find on the subject in the 
words of the institution ? Matthew, Luke, and Paul 
agree in stating that our Lord thanked, or gave thanks, 
— eucharistesas, — on this affecting and memorable oc- 
casion. Blessed appears in the English version of Mat- 
thew, but is, of course, an erroneous rendering. Only 



THE LORD'S SUPPER. 35 

Mark has eulogesas, he blessed. Now, as to bless and 
give thanks are analogous acts in this connection, it 
follows that, if ''to give thanks" cannot have, gram- 
matically speaking, for its objective case the bread and 
wine, but God, the phrase, he blessed, must likewise 
imply an act directed to God, and not to the elements in 
the Lord's Supper. The facts in the case may be briefly 
stated thus : The Saviour thanked God for the bread 
and wine, hence called the eucharist ; for it was his 
devout and praiseworthy custom always to give thanks 
before he partook of a meal, or gave entertainment to 
others. To bless, not the food, but God, the munificent 
giver of it, is likewise synonymous with offering thanks, 
or praising God for the blessings of bread and wine ; 
for eulogeo, according to Parkhurst, for example, among 
other significations, denotes to bless, as man does God, 
— that is, to praise, extol, laud, celebrate, magnify him : 
as, for instance, Christ did for the loaves and fishes, 
— Matthew, xiv. 19 ; Mark, vi. 41, viii. 1 ; Luke, ix. 16 — 
before he distributed them to his numerous and famish- 
ing guests. This liturgic act of the Saviour, at the 
Lord's Supper, was in strict conformity with the prac- 
tice to bless or give thanks, observed at the Jewish 
passover. God was thanked or blessed, that is, praised, 
for the manifold blessings, consisting of the wine and 
viands of which they joyously and gratefully partook 
on the anniversary of this sacred, commemorative, 
vernal feast. Our Lord simply repeated this pious 
and venerable custom, and, I have no doubt, no more 
thought, in doing so, to change the substance of the 
sacramental banquet into something supernatural and 



36 THE DOCTRINE OF 

incomprehensible than the Jews did that of their pass- 
over entertainment. It is also to be noticed that the 
text merely asserts that Christ blessed, thanked, not 
thanked or blessed it, for the pronoun it is omitted in 
the original; and besides, to thank or bless the sacra- 
mental elements instead of the bountiful Giver of them, 
would be simply a flagrant absurdity. 

If consecration does not produce impanation or con- 
substantiation, what does ?* Luther and the Form of 
Concord answer: It is the words of Christ, "This is 
my body." In the Larger Catechism, Luther writes, 
"It is true that if you omit the words of Christ, This 
is my body, or contemplate the bread and wine sepa- 
rately from these words, you have nothing but barely 
bread and wine ; but if they are retained in their 
proper connection with the visible elements, as they 
ought, then the bread and wine are, consequently, the 
true body and blood of Christ, for, as he says, so it is, 
inasmuch as he can neither lie nor deceive." 

What a pity that the clear import of a simple, self- 
evident, metaphorical language, by the unbiased judg- 
ment of mankind, should thus, in a most astound- 
ing manner, be either ignored or perverted ! Such 
proceeding is, doubtless, an easy method to found 
a creed, but, at the same time, it unhappily keeps up 
a historic connection with the Church that transub- 
stantiates and makes a god of its sacramental bread, 



* The so-called sacramental consecration in the Christian Church 
is entirel}' abnormal and unwarranted, and is an idolatrous blessing 
of the cleuicuts instead of CJod. 



THE LORD'S SUPPER. Z1 

hence denominated hostia. This, I venture to suggest, 
maybe regarded as a specimen of Conservative Prot- 
estantism. Alas! it^eems like Paradise with the ser- 
pent in it. Instead of interpreting the phrase, This is 
my body, according to the usus loquendi, of which the 
Greek text is a translation, and, agreeably to a legiti- 
mate exegesis, find a metaphor in the expression, Lu- 
ther understands it literally, and thus, unfortunately, 
as far at least as the dogma of the Real Presence is in- 
volved, the confidence in him, as a reliable commen- 
tator of the Holy Scriptures, is justly shaken. Strange, 
though his mind cannot be supposed to have been en- 
tirely freed from the pernicious influence of traditional 
prejudices, that the man who, in so eminent a degree, 
deserved the epithet " great" as well as ''good," could 
not perceive a likeness between the broken bread in the 
Lord's Supper and the broken body of the Redeemer 
on the cross, and thus recognize and assert the figura- 
tive import of the passage. What he took for granted 
he of c*ourse did not think necessary to prove, but 
contented himself with insisting on the supposed magic 
words, This is my body, as the ultimatum of the 
matter. 

At the conference which took place at Marburg, in 
1529, between Luther and Zwinglius, together with 
some of the most eminent doctors who adhered to the 
respective parties of these contending chiefs, on the 
subject of the Lord's Supper, Luther wrote with a 
piece of chalk on the table at which they sat, This is 
my body ; and thus, after a session of four days, ended 
this pacific discussion. Before these distinguished 

4 



38 THE DOCTRINE OF 

arbiters of the sacramental question parted tbej shook 
hands in token of mutual good will, with the unani- 
mous resolution earnestl}^ to beseech God to enable 
them, if they were in error, to attain, through the 
Holy Spirit, to a true and intelligent solution of the 
subject in dispute. They no doubt all kept word, and 
prayed often and fervently for Divine light and guid- 
ance, but, it appears, without much success; for all 
resolutely continued to maintain their preconceived 
opinions except Melanchthon, who, though not till 
after the expiration of several years, earned, or at 
least received, the opprobrious cognomen of Crypto- 
Calvinist. 

Consistency, we are assured, is a jeiuel, and its 
worth, I presume, can hardly be overestimated ; but I 
seek for it in vain among the views which Luther 
taught and others believe in reference to the Lord's 
Supper, a constituent part of the Gospel, and entirely 
concordant with its general teaching and significance. 
Thus, for example, it does no more necessarily follow 
that l)read and wine are the body and blood of Christ, 
or that the words. This is my body, should be taken 
literally, than it does that he is a 7\ml door when he 
says, I am the door of the sheep, or a 7'eal vine when 
he asserts, I am the true vine, etc. A person of or- 
dinary intelligence intuitively understands that when 
our Lord calls his followers sheep, branches, salt, 
light, etc., the language is metaphorical, and that, 
though it is the language of our Lord, unless other- 
wise instructed, it must bend to the plain yet inexora- 
ble laws of exegesis, and cannot be taken literally 



THE LORD'S SUPPER. 39 

except at the risk of stultifying the human mind, as 
well as committing a heinous sin against the holy 
oracles of God. 



CHAPTER y. 

Collateral Scrij^ture Texts, claimed in support of a Real Presence, 
examined, and their Inapplicability set forth. 

A MAIN collateral argument to prove that the body 
and blood of the Saviour are contained in the sacra- 
mental elements of bread and wine, is based, by the 
advocates of the Keal Presence, as may be seen by 
consulting the Schmalkald Articles, the Form of Con- 
cord, etc., upon the passage of Scripture recorded in 
the 1 Corinthians, x. 16 : '* The cup of blessing which 
we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of 
Christ ? The bread which we break, is it not the com- 
munion of the body of Christ?" These words have, 
indeed, reference to the Eucharist, but *' the cup of 
blessing" is simply the equivalent of the Hebrew cos 
habaracah, over which, according to Doctor Clarke, 
Lundius, and others, thanks and praises were offered 
at the conclusion of the paschal banquet. Where now 
appears the proof that in the words of the Apostle, just 
quoted, is taught the Real Presence ? According to 
the Literalists, the sacramental wine is the blood of 
Christ; and, of course, in drinking of the cup over 
which a blessing, that is, for ivhich thanksgiving or 



40 THE DOCTRINE OF 

praise hns been given, we have communion with Christ : 
and in eating the sacramental bread, it being, as is too 
hastily or too credulously taken for granted, the body 
of Christ, we have again, of course, communion with 
Christ. In other words, we thus eat and drink the 
body and blood of Christ, and are accordingly morally 
and physically united with him through means of the 
visible elements. If this is not a begging of the ques- 
tion, I should be glad to learn the meaning of that 
phrase. "We see here that a* point is to be gained, 
while the means which are used to this end seem not 
to be so scrupulously chosen as the importance of the 
subject seems to demand. I doubt not that Luther 
and many of his stanch adherents of the sixteenth 
century were entirely honest in their religious convic- 
tions ; but it is clearly one thing, even with great men, 
to be honestj and another to be capable of establishing 
articles of faith strictly conformable to the word of God. 
The most objectionable part of their conduct, doubtless, 
is that they treated all that differed from them on the 
subject of the Real Presence as heretics and reprobates, 
and uncharitably branded them with the name Sacra- 
mentarians. Reason had primarily nothing to do with 
the formation of their creed, being declared incompe- 
tent to arbitrate in matters of salvation, and their 
watchword seems to have been, Believe that what we 
tell you is true, and it is true, whether you under- 
stand it or not. A concise mode of inculcating faith 
that does not always go unrebuked, as the following 
ludicrous incident, recorded in D'Aubigne's History of 
the Rcfurmation, goes to show : " AVhen Erasmus was 



THE LORD'S SUPPER. 41 

in England, be was one day in earnest conversation 
with Sir Thomas More, the Lord High Chancellor, on 
the subject of transubstantiation. ' Only believe,' 
said More, ' that yoa receive the body of Christ, and 
you really have it.' Erasmus was silent. Shortly 
after this, wheu Erasmus was leaving" England, More 
lent him a horse to convey him to the port where he 
was to embark ; but Erasmus took it abroad with him. 
When More heard of it, he reproached him with much 
warmth ; but the only answer Erasmus gave him was 
in the following quatrain : 

" * Only believe thou sharest Christ's feast, say you, 
And never doubt the fact is therefore true : 
So write I of thy horse ; if thou art able 
But to believe it, he is in thy stable.' " 

But, to resume the thread of my argument and give 
the true sense of the misinterpreted text, I remark that 
to have communion with the body and blood of Christ, 
signifies to have fellowship with Christ, inasmuch as 
we are partakers of the sacramental bread and wine 
in commemoration of his vicarious death. The Chris- 
tians, thus eating and drinking sacramentally, commune 
with their Lord, or have fellowship with him, in pre- 
cisely the same way in which the heathens, at the 
celebration of their sacrificial banquets, had communion 
or fellowship with their gods, to whom the sacrifice 
was offered. Paul demonstrates in the following verse 
that the Corinthian congregation, though composed of 
many members, was still one body, inasmuch as it par- 
took of one bread, one sacrificial banquet, — the Chris- 
tian banquet, or Lord's Supper, — in memory of the cru- 

4* 



42 THE DOCTRINE OF 

cified body and shed blood of our Lord, while they re- 
frained from participating in Jewish or heathen sacri- 
ficial feasts. This view of the subject is corroborated 
and triumphantly established in the following verses 
of the same chapter, in w^hich the important matter 
under discussicfn is further illustrated and confirmed 
by additional evidence. In the eighteenth verse, the 
Apostle speaks of the unconverted Israelites, — " Israel 
after the flesh," — and asserts that inasmuch as they ate 
of the sacrifices offered to Jehovah, they " were par- 
takers of the altar" ; meaning not that ihej feasted on 
the altar, but that they declared themselves to be mem- 
bers of the Jewish Church, and in fellowship with the 
exalted object of the sacrificial rite — Jehovah. I shall 
omit in this place the following or nineteenth verse, as 
it is not deemed to be essential to a correct under- 
standing and proper appreciation of the subject. The 
Gentiles, noticed in the twentieth verse, sacrificing, ac- 
cording to the Apostle, to demons, erroneously called 
devils, in the English version, and not to God, he for- 
bade the Corinthian Christians to have fellowship with 
them, — that is, he demanded that they should not take 
part with them in the celebration of their sacrificial 
banquets, and thus become guilty of maintaining com- 
munion or fellowship with the gods. The Apostle, it 
should be observed here, distinctly speaks of a fellow- 
ship with the gods, a commemoration of the greatness 
of their deeds or the excellence of their character, not 
of an catiiKj of tJiciiil Finally, he plainly tells the 
Clirisliaus at Curinlh, in the twenty-first verse, that 
they must coiiline themselves exeUisivelv to the cele- 



TEE LORD'S SUPPER. 43 

bration of the Lord's Supper, and to the commemora- 
tion of the Saviour in the sacramental banquet, and 
not likewise take part in the communion feasts or cele- 
brations observed in honor of the gods ; that, in short, 
they could not be followers of Christ and devotees of 
polytheism at the same time, etc. 

In addition to the foregoing Scripture, supposed to 
furnish— besides the words of our Lord, This is my 
body — the main evidence in favor of a real presence, 
the following paragraph, recorded in 1 Corinthians, 
xi. 21-34, is appealed to as furnishing a decided triumph 
to that most extraordinary doctrine. It treats in a con- 
cise and forcible manner of a disorderly and irreverent 
celebration of the Lord's Supper, and of the pernicious 
consequences to which such shameful conduct must 
necessarily give rise. A large number of the Corin- 
thian Christians, unmindful, it seems, of the proper 
nature and responsibility of their sacred calling, asso- 
ciated their participation of the eucharistic rite with 
ordinary, yet festive-like, entertainments, in which they 
indulged to excess in eating and drinking : and thus, 
under these highly reprehensible and disgraceful cir- 
cumstances, they were unable to discern the Lord's 
body in the sacramental bread and wine, or, in other 
words, to realize in the bread and wine the sacred 
symbols of the body and blood of Christ, offered as an 
expiatory sacrifice for our sins ; that hence they were 
guilty of "eating and drinking" — of the sacramental 
banquet — " unworthily^^- and that thus, "they ate and 
drank damnation to themselves." The damnation, 
krima, in the original, mentioned here, I may state in 



44 THE DOCTRINE OF 

passing", means punishment or suffering, which resulted 
as a natural effect of their impious, intemperate be- 
havior; yet this damnation was not, by any means, 
tantamount to final reprobation, but disciplinary or 
corrective, and, therefore, adapted to amend the evil 
ways of these unworthy Christians, as is evident from 
the tenor of the thirty-second verse, " But when we are 
judged, we are chastened of the Lord, that we should 
not be condemned with the icorld.^'' 

From this exhibition of undoubted facts, the intelli- 
gent reader will readil}'' perceive that if the controverted 
tenet of a Real Presence, in the Lord's Supper, has no 
better support than that which this passage supplies, 
in which the Apostle simply treats of the nature, guilt, 
and consequences of a bacchanalian celebration of the 
Lord's Supper, by a numerous part of the members of 
the Corinthian congregation, and the necessity of a 
devout and careful preparation for a worthy participa- 
tion in its solemnities and blessings, as well as a proper 
appreciation of the design and use of the sacred insti- 
tution, its chances to be recognized among the scrip- 
tural authorities for our faith are indeed very small, 
and I hesitate not, therefore, to challenge the brethren 
of Symbolic Lutheranism to adduce the least proof 
from Scripture, legitimately interpreted, in substantia- 
tion of tiiis clearly anti-biblical dogma, the relic of a 
pre-Reformation period, and a calamitous source of 
distraction to the Protestant Church. 

I5ut why do the Symbolist Lutherans lay so much 
stress upon the doctrine of the Real Presence ? Do 
they suppose that that doctrine, in spite of its manifest 



THE LORD'S SUrPER. 45 

incongruity with the general tenor of Holy Writ, is 
especially calculated and designed to honor our Lord ? 
Whatever maybe their motive in thus obstinately per- 
sisting, contrary to -the laws of correct exegesis and 
the plain dictates of common sense, in a literal render- 
ing of the words. This is my body, it appears quite 
evident to the unsophisticated mind that they involve 
themselves in the charge of putting a false construction 
upon the word of God, and that, such being the case, 
it can hardly be expected that its Divine author should 
hence feel himself especially honored. 



CHAPTER VI. 

The Doctrine of the Real Presence comes under the Category of 
Sensitive Knowledge, and therefore its Truth or Fallacy may be 
,**f6sted. 

In the fifth edition of the Book of Concord, published 
by H. Ludwig, pp. 602-3, speaking of the different 
modes, according to which Christ is generally or in- 
definitely present, Luther thus writes: "Again, in 
the Lord's Supper, Christ is present in a spiritual, in- 
comprehensible manner, inasmuch as he is not confined 
to space, but, as seems good to him, is omnipresent to 
all creatures, and is thus similar to my vision, — to use 
a homely comparison, — which extends through air, 
light, or water, and is not limited to locality or space ; 
similar to sound, which is likewise exempt from the 



46 THE DQCTRIXE OF 

trammels of physical laws, and passes, unobstructed, 
through air, water, a wall, or other solid substance; 
and finally, similar to light and heat, which, with an 
equal freedom of motion, penetrate through air, water, 
glass, crystal, etc. It was in conformity to modes of 
presence or laws of mobility, corresponding to these, 
that our Lord escaped through a closed grave, entered 
through a barred door, came to have real presence in 
the Lord's Supper, and, as is commonly believed, was 
born of the Virgin.'* 

In the foregoing remarkable specimen of ignorance 
of the laws of physics, Luther affirms that the Real 
Presence of Christ, in the Lord's Sapper, is to be ac- 
counted for on the principle, conformably to which our 
vision is not limited to locality or space, but extends, 
without impediment, to any distance through air, light, 
and water. But the air, light, and water, through 
which it extends or passes, are themselves confined to 
locality or space, and the fact must, it seems, be 
familiar to every one, that our sight is of very limited 
range, reaching but a short distance into visible space. 
Persons, ignorant of the laws of optics, often fancy that 
they see objects, when they only see their reflection in 
the air or water or other bright, transparent bodies. 
If, therefore, our Lord is not more omnipresent than 
our vision is far-reaching, then, indeed, he must be 
very circumscribed in his relation to space. Sound, 
the Reformer likewise assures us, meets with no ob- 
struction in its passage through air, water, a wall, or 
other solid substance. That sound cannot be propa- 
gated beyond a given distance deaf people will testify, 



TEE LORD'S SUFFER. 4Y 

and even the mighty peal of thunder, springing into ex- 
istence at the fiat of the electric flash, embraces but a 
very limited area in its appalling reverberations, in 
comparison with the extent of our globe. Hence, 
again, if the Saviour's real presence, in the Lord's 
Supper, is not more v^idely extensible than sound, his 
ubiquity is not only local, but local in a marked degree. 
Finally, light and heat, we are told, penetrate with- 
out obstruction through air, water, glass, crystal, etc. 
If this is so, whence comes night,. or the ice of the 
polar seas ? At some depth beneath the earth's crust im- 
penetrable darkness reigns, and could man, with his 
present organs of sight, appear there, the transparent 
glass or crystal, visible and resplendent on its surface, 
would be undistinguishable by him, amid the surround- 
ing objects, shrouded in the sombre habiliments of 
everlasting night. It is clear, therefore, that light and 
heat have their limits, and that if the Saviour's omni- 
presence, sacramentally considered, is not superior to 
their diffusive properties, his ubiquity will not estab- 
lish the doctrine of the Real Presence in the Lord's 
Supper.* 

■-••' The following facts claim the attention of the reader: Dense, 
dark bodies do not reflect, but absorb, light. In such case it is iso- 
lated, and can, of course, afford no basis of a comparison with the 
attributes of ubiquity. Again, light — whether emitted directly from 
the sun, or reflected from the planets — moves at the rate of about 
two hundred thousand miles in a second, and though this velocity is 
inconceivably great, it implies locomotion, and is carried through 
space by successive ether-waves, thus precluding similitude to omni- 
presence, and, therefore, ill adapted to prove and illustrate the latter. 

"When the air," writes Professor Tyndall, "possesses the particu- 



48 THE DOCTRINE OF 

As to the "manner of Christ's birth, as an instance of 
invisible hoclily presence, it suffices to say that the 
Gospel, according to Luke, ii. 22, flatly refutes so 
absurd an idea. An immaculate birth can deserve 
attention only in so far as it may be considered a 
counterpart of the monkish "dogma of the immaculate 
conception." 

That Jesus appeared among his assembled disciples 

lar density and elasticity corresponding to the temperature of freez- 
ing water, the velocity of sound in it is one thousand and ninety feet 
in a second." Some philosophers differ somewhat from this state- 
ment, and declare the mean rate of the velocity of sound, whether 
loud or weak, to amount to about eleven hundred and thirty feet in a 
second of time. Sound, then, instead of being iustantaneou sly, uni- 
versally diffusible, or affording a good similitude of ubiquity, moves, 
or is successively propagated, through space, and in its most acceler- 
ated motion or favorable condition of progression, requires an hour 
to pass through a distance of seven hundred and forty-three miles: 
a rate of velocity which would occupy thirty-three hours to pass 
around the earth. Hence, if the ubiquity of Christ has no more omni- 
presence than the phenomenon called sound, with which it is com- 
pared in the text, it rests upon mere assertion instead of fact. Sound, 
moreover, is interrupted in its motion by the interposition of solid 
bodies, for it does not readily pass from one medium to another. 
Therefore the likening of the ubiquity of Christ to the propagation 
of sound ignores these obstacles, and is consequently futile. 

Professor C. A. Young, of Dartmouth College, in his lecture on 
" The Sun, and the Phenomena of its Atmosphere," writes as follows: 
" If sounds could travel through the celestial spaces at the same rate 
as in our air, then the thunder of a solar storm might reach us in a 
little more than fourteen years." 

Finally, to bestow a passing thought upon some of the properties 
of heat, I remark, for example, that the rays of heat cannot bo trans- 
mitted through opaque bodies, but that impinging on such bodies, they 
arc cither rellccted or absorbed, and the idea of ubi(iuity is, of course, 
nipped iu the bud. 



THE LORD'S SUFFER. 49 

in the character of a disembodied spirit, next demands 
a brief notice. From the fact that he entered in a 
bodily, yet invisible manner, through a barred or 
locked door, the feasibility and therefore truth of the 
tenet of a real, bodily sacramental presence is hastily 
assumed : an assumption which needs corroboration, 
for though the disciples, as appears from Luke, xxiv. 
36-40, were much alarmed when they beheld Jesus 
suddenly standing in the midst of them, and really 
thought his ingress had been ghostlike, it does not 
follow that their opinion was well founded. The 
words of the sacred historian are these: " They were 
terrified and affrighted, and supposed that they had 
seen a spirit. And he said unto them, Why are ye 
troubled ? and why do thoughts arise in your hearts? 
Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: 
handle me and see, for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, 
as ye see me have," etc. Christ here clearly repudiates 
the idea of a purely spiritual entrance, and I will only 
add that flesh and bones are not well adapted either 
to ubiquity or invisibility. 

But we are finally told, that our Lord made his 
egress from his closed grave by again assuming the 
semblance and properties of a disembodied spirit, 
while the fact of his incarnation remained unimpaired. 
I would fain learn how the Reformer knows this. 
When the grave was visited in the morning, imme- 
diately after the resurrection, it was found to be closed ; 
but our Lord, who could bodily arise from the dead, 
could also bodily pass out of the grave, opening and 
shutting it, if it thus pleased him, even unperceived 

5 



50 THE DOCTRINE OF 

by the soldiers placed there by Pilate to guard it. At 
any rate, as neither Christ nor the writers of the New- 
Testament ever refer, in so many words, to an actual 
metamorphosis on the occasion, the case, I humbly 
conceive, merits no further attention. 

If, in the Lord's Supper, the body and blood of our 
Lord are really present in and under the external signs 
of bread and wine, it is knowledge, not faith, that must 
inform us of the fact ; for, as stated in the heading of 
this chapter, the question comes under the category of 
sensitive knowledge, and may be tested agreeably to 
the laws of induction, as to its truthfulness or fallacy. 
If the body and blood of our Lord are really present 
in the sacramental elements, the communicant must 
become apprised of the extraordinary fact in the act of 
oral manducalion, or, in other words, in receiving and 
eating them, but he is not ; for his sense of taste per- 
ceives only the presence of bread and wine. Both 
elements taste as they would taste if they were not 
sacramentally used ; they have the aspect of the ordi- 
nary bread and wine of the same kind or denomina- 
tion ; they have the same weight; and, if they are 
chemically analyzed, they are found to have the same 
composition and }>roperties. How, then, can the real 
body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, cruciBedand 
shed for us, be in, icith, and under, or only in and 
under, the external signs of bread and wine ? For the 
Real Presence is not a presence of the benefits, result- 
ing to mankind from the vicarious death of our Lord, 
but an organic bodily presence, such as was exhibited 
at the crucifixion on Calvary, and must, therefore, have 



THE LORD'S SUPPER. 51 

sensitive and palpable properties, however men may 
twaddle about a spiritual eating and drinking. To pro- 
vide a feast of material aliment, and then tell the 
guests to partake of it spiritually and supernaturally, 
could only be regarded and treated as ridiculous trifling, 
and I may be allowed to observe that our Lord was 
much too earnestly engaged in the arduous work of 
saving souls to have either leisure or inclination for 
trifling. 

To illustrate the doctrine of the Real Presence, and 
render its mysticism less obscure or more plausible, 
Luther was in the habit of using a simile, founded 
on a union of heat and iron. " Christ," according to 
him, writes D'Aubigne, *' desired to give to believers a 
full assurance of salvation, and, in order to seal this 
promise to them with most effect, had added thereto 
bis real body in the bread and wine. Just," con- 
tinued he, '' as iron and fire, though two different sub- 
stances, meet and are blended in a red-hot bar, so that 
in every part of it there is at once iron and fire ; so, 
a fortiori, the glorified body of Christ exists in every 
part of the bread." I remark that even so subtile a 
body as heat cannot permeate the interspaces of iron 
without producing a marked change in the metal : such 
as increase of temperature, combustion, red or white 
color, expansion, malleability, etc. Now, the asserted 
Real Presence produces no sensible change whatever in 
the sacramental bread and wine, not even in their 
weight, though it is the real, substantial body and blood 
of our Lord, notwithstanding the evasive postulate 
made here, that it is, as such, his glorified body, while 



52 TUE DOCTRINE OF 

heat, reckoned among imponderable substances, in its 
union with a material body,* attests its presence in so 
manifold and decided a manner! Alas! it seems to 
me, at this moment, as if I heard the Saviour once 
more exclaim, in solemn sadness of soul, " In vain 
do they worship me, teaching for doctrine the com- 
mandments of men /" 



CIIAPTEK YIL 

In which will bo shown why so much stress is laid upon the Doctrine 
of the Real Presence, while its Untenableness and Dangerous 
Tendency are pointed out. 

In the Larger Catechism of Luther, we are in- 
structed to believe that the ineffable blessings of re- 
demption, procured for us through the death of Christ, 
are imparted to us only in the Lord's Supper, in virtue 
of the words of the Saviour, "This — the broken bread — 
is my body, which is given for you ; this cup is the New 
Testament in my blood, which is shed for you for the 
remission of sins," etc., and not simply in consequence 
of his self-immolation for our sakes on Calvary. These 
words of the Divine Founder of the New Testament, 
it seems, derive their extraordinary power in the 
Lord's Supper from the circumstance that his body 



*• I shall show in the sequel, that the glorified body of the Saviour 
is not more likely to bo in impanatc combination with tho elements 
of tho Lord's Supper than tho natural body. 



THE LORD'S SUPPER. 63 

and blood are in, with, and under the external signs of 
bread and wine.* Having taught that the validity of 
the Lord's Supper is not impaired, but that it is still 
the true Sacrament, or, in other words, Christ's body 
and blood, though a knave should administer or receive 
it, the Reformer thus proceeds : "Let us now consider 
the design and benefit, in reference to which the Lord's 
Supper was instituted; for this is of great moment, in 
order that we may know what advantage we derive 
from its use. This knowledge may be readily acquired 
by giving proper heed to the words, This is my body 
and blood, given and shed for you for the remission of 
sins. The sense of which is briefly this : We celebrate 
the Lord's Supper for the purpose of obtaining the gift, 
in and through which we receive the forgiveness of 
sins. But how is this end accomplished ? I answer, 
In consequence of the words of the institution confer- 
ring the gift of the remission or forgiveness of sins ; for 
it is for the sake of attaining this end that the Saviour 
bids me eat and drink the sacramental bread and 
wine," etc. 

In Luther's Smaller Catechism, we find essentially 
the same doctrine advanced on this subject. The an- 
swer to the question. What are the benefits derived 
from thus eating and drinking in the Lord's Supper ? 
is thus given : " They are pointed out in those words 
of the institution, ' Given and shed for you for the re- 

* The Form of Concord gives the formula of the Real Presence in 
these words: in pane, cum pane, et sub jjane : in, with, and under the 
bread. 

5* 



54 THE DOCTRINE OF 

mission of sins'; which words show us that forgive- 
ness of sin, life and salvation, are imparted to us in 
the Sacrament ; for where there is remission of sins, 
there of course is also life and salvation." These 
benefits, thus resulting from the use of the Lord's 
Supper, are, according to Luther, as appears from the 
teaching of the same catechism, not owing to a corpo- 
real eating and drinking of the sacramental bread and 
wine, inasmuch as mere eating and drinking cannot 
produce such effects, but it is that solemn declaration, 
" Which is given and shed for you, for the remission of 
sins" ; which words, beside the literal eating and drink- 
ing, are to be considered as the main part of the sacra- 
ment. Hence whoever sincerely believes these words 
has wiiat they promise, namely, the forgiveness of sins. 
AVhat first deserves our notice here is, that the 
Lord's Supper is said to be instituted mainly with a 
view to afford an opportunity to the believing commu- 
nicant to appropriate to himself the Saviour's words, 
This is my body and blood, given and shed for you, 
for the remission of sins ; and thus, in so doing, re- 
ceive what they purport to convey, namely, the for- 
giveness of sins; whereas it is, as I shall demonstrate 
in the sequel, instituted expressly a& a memorial, pre- 
figurative of the body and blood of our Lord, to be 
given and shed for us ui)on the cross. The words, 
This is my body. This is my blood, etc., given and 
shed for you, for the remission of sins, are always in 
force in their relation or applicability to the sincere be- 
liever; and not only on actual sacramental occasions, 
because Christ did not make expiation for us in the 



THE LORD'S SUPPER. 55 

Lord's Supper, but on the cross. It is not, therefore, 
in the sacramental institution that we have '* life and 
salvation," in the participation of the fruit of a.consub- 
stantiational union' of the external elements of bread 
and wine with the body and blood of Christ, but 
through the vicarious passion and death of Christ 
symbolized by the eucharistic bread and wine, which, 
in themselves, are nothing but baked flour, on the one 
hand, and the juice of the grape, on the other, ren- 
dered sacred on a sacred occasion, and celebrated for 
sacred ends. 

Again, if "forgiveness of sins, life and salvation, 
are imparted to us in the sacrament," then the Lord's 
Supper is a substitute for the cross, and Christ's 
declaration, that his body and blood are given and 
shed for us, vitiates, nay, nullifies, the sacrifice of him- 
self for our sins ; for when he uttered those brief but 
emphatic words, he had not yet suffered death in our 
behalf. Hence it is clear, if plain language can make 
anything clear to us, that the words, This is my body. 
This is my blood, etc., are to be taken metaphorically, 
and that they signify, denote, represent, typify, etc., as 
has been shown on a former occasion, the body and 
blood of Christ to be offered up in the immediate 
future for the redemption of mankind. 

The doctrine set forth in these catechisms, on the 
subject of the Real Presence, is not only radically 
erroneous, but of decidedly dangerous tendency. 
Thus, for instance, it eminently encourages formalism 
among its adherents, and hence, where it prevails, re- 
vivals of religion, at least in the Spener and Wesleyan 



56 TUE DOCTRINE OF 

spirit, are unknown. I have known repeated instances 
where persons who for many years had not appeared 
at the communion-table, and whose lives had all that 
time, been undistinguishable from those of "the chil- 
dren of this world," who, supposing themselves at the 
point of death, or perhaps actually being in a dying 
state, without any apparent signs of penitence, ex- 
pressed a wish to have the Lord's Supper administered 
to them, while they seemed unconscious,— owing, doubt- 
less, more or less, to the influence of such sacramental 
views as we have here found inculcated, — that anything 
more w^as needed, to be a worthy communicant, than 
the conviction that, according to the words of Luther, 
" He alone is truly worthy and well-prepared that be- 
lieves in these words. Given and shed for you, for the 
remission of sins." It is a fact which challenges refu- 
tation, that many well-meaning professors of religion, 
led astray by notions derived from the dogma of the 
Heal Presence, are in the habit of ascribing to the bare 
use of the Lord's Supper a kind of talismanic property, 
and it is accordingly, in their opinion, virtually a mere 
formality or routine observance, or, in other words, an 
opus operatum. Of course, Luther by no means de- 
signed to bring about so sad and mischievous a result, 
by promulgating his singular views of the Real Pres- 
ence ; but such fruit is the natural product of seed at 
once exotic and noxious. 

If the Lord's Supper must necessarily be a saving 
ordinance, agreeably to the facts brought to light in 
this chapter, the question may not be quite irrelevant. 
What became of those Christians who lived anterior 



THE LORD'S SUPPER. 57 

to the iDStitutioQ of the Lord's Supper? For they 
could not in any way be benefited by the words of the 
Saviour, This is my body, This is my blood, given and 
shed for you for the remission of sins, if belief in them 
is essential to salvation, as we are positively taught 
in the Reformer's catechisms, the Form of Concord, etc., 
in which, to invite attention to the fact once more, it 
is repeatedly and most emphatically afQrmed, that 
life and salvation are imparted to us in the Sacrament, 
in virtue of our faith in the words of the institution, 
*' Given and shed for you, for the remission of sins." 

Finally, the doctrine that the merits of Christ are ap- 
priated through means of the Lord's Supper undoubt- 
edly betrays a lingering sympathy of the Reformer, 
without perhaps a consciousness of the fact, with the 
Roman doctrine of transubstantiation ; a leaning, by 
traditional links and educational prejudices, towards 
the scholastic mysticism of a dark age ; and hence the 
Lord's Supper, as interpreted by him, has soterial 
efficacy or expiatory virtue. What has been here said 
in reference to Luther, is of course equally true in its 
application to his rigid and literal adherents.* 

■•'• That I do not prefer an unlikely or historically untrue charge 
against Symbolic Lutheranism of the sixteenth century, with a still 
existing propensity towards Roman Catholicism, the following sen- 
tence, quoted from the comments on the twenty-first article of the 
Augsburg Confession, as they appear in "the Church Book" of the 
Synod of Pennsylvania,* a true representative, in the nineteenth 

* The designation, S3^nod of Pennsylvania or Ministerium of Pennsylvauia, 
is an abbreviation of tlie full title : The German-EvaDgelical Lutheran Minis- 
terium of Pennsylvania and Adjacent States. 



58 THE DOCTRINE OF 



CHAPTER Till. 

The Body and Blood of Christ were only Accessories, not Principals, 
in the Accomplishment of Redemption. 

The great stress which is laid upon the dogma of 
the Ileal Presence of the body and blood of the Saviour, 
in the Lord's Supper, is doubtless owing, in no small 
degree, to the over-estimate of the part which they bore 

century of the Christian era, of " the faith once delivered to— the 
fathers" of the Book of Concord, will verify : " This," thus begins 
the sentence referred to, "is about the sum of doctrine among us, in 
which can be seen that there is nothing which is discrepant with the 
Scriptures, or with the Church Catholic, or even with the Roman 
Church, so far as that Chur^^h is known from writers— the writings of 
the Fathers." 

Now, if the writings of the Fathers of the Church are true exponents 
of Romanism, as is here claimed, and Romanism is scriptural, what 
need was there of the Reformation, which set out from the principle 
that the Roman Church was monstrously corrupt; that a reforma- 
tion of it was imperatively demanded ; and that, accordingly, this 
reformation must carry back its efforts to the pristine Christianity of 
the apostolic age?* 

*I adduco.as a further instance of tlio too great connivance observed 
towards a corrupt Church, tlio attention which is paid, in the Lutheran 
" Church Alniauiic," to llonian Catliolic Church festivals. In what condition 
this almanac appears this year I cannot say, as I have not examined it, but a 
few examples may suffice to give an idea of its character last year, or the 
year 1871. . ^ 

Tlio festival in the Roman Catholic Churdi called "Corpus Dommi Jesu 
Christi," is sacred to the hostia or consecrated sacramental bread, which, 
according to a dogma of this Church, is transubstantiated or changed, by the 
Bolomn act of consecration, into the veritable body and blood, soul and 
divinity, of our Lord Jesus Christ; and the notice of this festival figures m a 



THE LORD'S SUPPER, 59 

in the grand work of redemption. They were, I may 
confidently say, in fact, mere accessories in the sacred 
and awful drama enacted on Calvary by the Son of God. 
Flesh and blood cannot make redemption : they can 
only be vehicles in its accomplishment ; and therefore, 
in strict propriety, be regarded simply as mere passive, 
altogether secondary, instruments or adventitious ac- 
companiments in the holy mission of mercy and pardon 

Lutheran almanac as if it was one of the recognized dogmas of the Lutheran 
Church ! 

Candlemas is another Roman Catholic festival taken under the patronage 
of this almanac, calculated, by such dalliance with a corrupt Church, to injui'e 
the cause of true Lutherauism. "On this day," says Webster, "the Roman 
Catholics consecrate all the candles and tapers which are to be used in their 
churches dui'ing the whole year. In Rome, the pope performs the ceremony 
himself, and distributes wax candles to cardinals and others, who carry them 
in procession through the great hall of the pope's palace," etc. 

Shrove-Tuesday and Ash-Wednesday next claim our attention as ecclesias- 
tical curiosities in this otherwise excellent almanac. "On Shrove-Tuesday," 
writes the learned author just quoted, "all the people of England, when 
Roman Catholics, were obliged to confess their sins, one by one, to their parish 
priest, after which they dined on pancakes or fritters," etc. 

Ash-Wednesday derives its name from a custom observed on that day by 
the priests of the Roman Catholic Church, of sprinkling ashes on the heads 
of penitents. With this day begins the quadragesimal or forty-days fast be- 
fore Easter, in the Roman Catholic and other churches. The Carnival, cele- 
brated in papal countries, and the counterpart of the ancient Saturnalia, is 
the devout and edifying introduction to this prolonged but, it seems, not very 
macerating fast. 

St. Patrick, too, has a place in this most indulgent almanac, and the Apostle 
of the Irish seems to be in a fair way to receive the honors of saintship be- 
yond the hallowed precincts of Maynooth and of Rome. 

On the third of May, the Invention of the Cross is celebrated in Roman 
Catholic countries, in commemoration of the finding of our Saviour'' s cross ; 
and as this finding of the cross is, of course, an undoubted historical fact, the 
Church Almanac does well to notice and perpetuate its memory. 

I invite attention but to one more Roman Catholic festival mentioned in 
this almanac, the Elevation of the Cross ; a practice of which every Protestant 
must cordially approve, as both its spirit and origin are alike evangelical and 
instructive ! 



60 THE DOCTRINE OF 

of our Lord Jesus Christ. It is the mind, — the human 
and the infinite mind, — in the person of the Redeemer, 
that brought to a happy issue the sublime and wondrous 
achievement on the cross. Yes, let me repeat it, it is 
mind, soul, the immortal intelligence, in the blessed, in- 
carnate Saviour, that alone could, and did, execute the 
important and arduous task of rescuing, exalting, and 
saving sin-lost man. I shall, of course, not stop here 
to inquire what quantitative relation the two natures, 
in the Divine person of the Saviour, sustained to each 
other in making expiation for us ; for this is a problem 
which I do not presume to solve, and which, in order 
to the attainment of salvation, needs no solution ; but sim- 
ply state that it was the immortal element, so to speak, 
in the incarnate God-man that wrought out salvation for 
mankind, and not his body and blood, a fact which, con- 
sidered separately or abstractly, cannot, from the very 
nature and magnitude of the case, admit of the least 
doubt. Without Divinity, on the one hand, and the im- 
perishable human principle on the other, the body and 
blood of Christ would have been mere dead, inert matter, 
incompetent to any action or passion, let alone expiatory 
and redemptive action and passion. Indeed, the body 
and blood of our Lord had directly no more to do with 
achieving our salvation, except as external instruments, 
and as means of a visible display of that momentous 
fact, than had the robe w^hich he wore at the bar of Pon- 
tius Pilate, or the swaddling clothes in the manger of 
Bethlehem. "Why, then, such being the case, did the 
Saviour say, at the institution of the Lord's Supper, 
This is my body; this is my blood, given and shed for 



THE LORD'S SUPTER. Gl 

you for the remission of sins, thus apparently at least 
ascribing redemptive efiicacy to his body, given for us, 
and to his blood, shed for us? I reply, the human mind 
is usually much more pov^erfully impressed in witness- 
ing, or, in imagination only, contemplating, a human 
body fixed to a cross, crowned with thorns, pierced with 
a lance, and blanched and writhing from the effect of 
the sharp mental agonies endured and manifested in the 
appalling death-struggle, than it is possible for it to be 
by a simple reference to mental distress, however intense 
this may be, or however vivid and pathetic should be 
the eloquent and graphic portraiture that might be 
given of it. It is, therefore, the body secured to the 
cross, torn, bleeding, dying, dead, that is said to be 
given for us, and the blood, flowing from its side, or, 
sweat-like, oozing from its pores, Luke, xxii. 44 ; but, 
in fact, the body and blood of Christ, thus exhibited to 
view, in a state ordinarily regarded as simply indica- 
tive of exquisite bodily suffering, are really but out- 
ward displays of the invisible act of redemption, sym- 
bols or signs of the inward agony and struggle endured 
by the immortal mind. As if he had said. Behold this 
broken bread and poured-out wine, they are to put you 
in mind of the broken, bleeding state awaiting my body 
on the cross, and thus enable you to judge or form some 
idea of my inward throes, endured in the vast and 
overwhelming birth-labors of redemption. Redemption 
is based upon the combined part which the Divine 
and the human spirit performed in the exalted person 
of the Saviour, and not upon the exhibition, which the 
flesh and blood — in themselves mere organic matter — 

6 



g2 THE DOCTRINE OF 

were led to make of it ; and, therefore, the doctrine of 
the Real Presence, consisting of the body and blood 
of Christ, under the external signs of bread and wine, 
in the Lord's Supper, must, judged from this point of 
view,— the only really logical, and therefore tenable 

one, be regarded as at best only specious, — a baseless 

assumption ; for, as we have seen, the body and blood 
of Christ have actually no direct and absolute action or 
efficacy in the origination and completion of our salva- 
tion. Hence here, as elsewhere in the Divine teachings 
of the Gospel, " It is the spiHt that quickeneth," while 
''ihQJlesh profiteth nothing." John, vi. 63. 



CHAPTER IX. 

The Ubiquity or Omnipresence of Christ's Body. 
PARAC.RAPn I. 

Tlic Ul.i.iuity w Oiniiiiircscnee of Christ's Terrestrial Kody. 

That, during his sojourn on earth, Christ was true 
man as well as true God, is the unanimous teaching of 
all orthodox creeds. He was born, it seems, accord- 
ing to the New-Testament historians, like any other 
cldld, Luke, ii. 22 ; grew up gradually to man's estate, 
in the numner of other children, Luke, ii. 52; ate and 
drank in a human-like way, Matthew, xi. 19 ; wept and 
sorrowed, as does poor humanity everywhere, John, 



THE LORD'S SUPPER. 63 

xi. 35 ; was jojons with the joyful, as a genial person 
would be likely to be, John ii. 1-11 ; and uttered, as 
an honest human teacher would feel himself bound to 
do, the sentiments of profound indignation at the fla- 
gitious conduct of the hypocritical scribes and Phari- 
sees, Matthew, xxiii. 13-33, etc. But the portions of 
Scriptures, to which I shall more especially refer as the 
chief basis of my present argument, are those which 
we find recorded in Philippians, ii. t, 8, and in He- 
brews, iv. 14, 15. According to the passage in Phi- 
lippians, Jesus was made in the likeness of men, and 
found in fashion as a man ; while the text in He- 
brews teaches essentially the same facts, with the addi- 
tion of several important particulars, in the following 
impressive language : '' Seeing then that we have a 
great high-priest, that is passed into the heavens, Jesus 
the Son of Grod, let us hold fast our profession. For 
we have not an high-priest which cannot be touched 
with the feeling of our infirmities ; but loas in all points 
tempted like as we are, yet without sin." 

Christ, having thus become incarnate, or assumed 
humanity, is henceforth, or while this incarnate state 
lasts, no longer in possession of Divinity, in an abso- 
lute sense, but in that dual state peculiar to the Grod- 
man, and which is restricted in its relation to humanity 
to the limits and conditions of place and time. I do 
not, by any means, say that he could not, at any time 
that he might please to do so, sever such connection, 
and assume Godhood without the clogs and imbecilities 
of manhood ; but I say that as long as he maintains 
the incarnate relation to man he ceases to be ubiquitous 



64 TEE DOCTRINE OF 

or omnipresent, — a prerogative of the pre-incarnate 
state, which he, of course, voluntarily relinquished whea 
he assumed the trammels incident to humanity. To 
obviate this difficulty, so glaringly militant against the 
dogma of the Real Presence, it is, I conceive, of no use 
to talk about the doctrine de communicatione idioma- 
tum, — that is, of the reciprocal interchange of the 
Divine and human attributes, in the person of Christ, 
possessing at once a Divine and human nature.* Such 
interchange of attributes, except in some, to be sure, 
adequate degree, and temporally, namely, during the 
consummation of the great act of redemption, I am 
constrained to deny, and, on the contrary, to maintain 
that Divinity and humanity consisting of but one per- 
son, this pevson is incapabfe, owing to the human ele- 
ment forming a part of it, of ubiquity. As certainly as 
man is of local or circumscribed presence, so certainly 
must the Saviour in his humanity be local or confined 
in his mobility ; for such is the lot of man, and he " is 
in the likeness of men, and in fashion as a man." If 
Christ, therefore, should impart Divinity to humanity, 
so as to confer on it ubiquity, it would instantly cease 
to be proper humanity, and he could no longer be re- 
garded or treated as "the AVord" that "was made 
flesh, and dwelt anjong us." John, i. 14. 

I shall now briefly invite attention to the proof that 
the terrestrial body of Ciirist, which is claimed to be 
])resent in the sacramental bread and wine, was so far 
from being ubiquitous, that he that was incarnate in 



* Form of Concord. 



THE LORD'S SUPPER. 65 

that body was accustomed, during his earthly sojourn, 
to move about within very narrow limits, and was, 
besides, never known, as far as appears from the history 
of his life, transmitted to us in the gospel, to be in 
more than one place at the same time ; which, I humbly 
conceive, would not have been the case if he had pos- 
sessed a body capable, by a conferred attribute of 
Divinity, of the sublime exercise of ubiquity. 

It is a law of physics, to which there is no exception, 
that a body cannot be in more than one place at the 
same time. This is a property of matter, with which 
God himself has endowed it, and to which the mightiest 
monarch on the throne, as well as the smallest atom 
of dust, are alike inexorably subject. Even the Lord 
Jesus Christ, in his humility, is not exempt from it. 
Thus, when he lay in the manger, he was nowhere 
else, and the " wise men from the East" found him 
only there. When he resolved to go to Egypt, he had 
to leave Bethlehem before he could carry his resolution 
into effect. When he departed from the far-famed 
land of the Pharaohs, to take up his abode at Nazareth, 
he had to go there progresswely, in a manner similar 
to another human being; and when "he went about 
doing good," which, in his benignant and exalted 
capacity of Saviour, he always did, he went — agree- 
ably to the laws of motion — from place to place, ad- 
vancing by degrees, and at the expense of a certain 
amount of physical force, as did the least and most 
obscure of his followers ; and we find no trace, in his 
grand missionary and soterial operations, indicative 
either of the possession or of the practice of ubiquity. 

6* 



66 THE DOCTRINE OF 

I will come and heal him, Matthew, viii. 1 ; I go to 
prepare a place for jou, John, xiv. 2, etc. The words 
of Doctor Clarke, though uttered without direct refer- 
ence to this subject, are eminently appropriate, and ac- 
cordingly deserve a place here. Treating of the prop- 
erties of matter or body, less, to be sure, like a 
commentator than a philosopher, he writes : " To these 
belong extension, divisibility, figurability, and mobility, 
which imply limitation: God and matter have essen- 
tially contrary propertiesy 

From the foregoing train of reasoning, I think it is 
evident that God, as the absolute Divinity, has attri- 
butes which the God-man no longer possesses. Add 
to this already imposing array of testimony the decisive 
fact, that the crucified body of the Saviour no longer 
exists, and what becomes of the great stumbling- 
block in the Lutheran Church, — the dogma of the Real 
Presence ? It is carefully to be borne in mind, that it 
is emphatically the identical body that expired upon 
the cross that is declared to be present in the sacra- 
mental bread and wine, or, in other words, to be in, 
with, and under these visible and tangible constituents 
of the holy supper : " Of the Lord's Supper, we teach 
that in it the true body and blood of Christ are really 
present, under the form of bread and wine, and thus, at 
once, distributed and received." (Augsburg Confes- 
sion, Article Tenth.) In the Apology of the Augsburg 
Confession, Melanchthon, in addition to this statement, 
indorses what St. Cyril, Bishop of Jerusalem, says of 
the Lord's Supper, " That Christ is bodily present and 
distributed in the Sacrament" These startling views 



THE LORD'S SUPPER. 6t 

are substantially reiterated in the Form of Concord, 
and read thus : " We believe, teach, and confess that 
the words of the Lord's Supper are not to be under- 
stood differently from their literal import, and thus the 
bread and wine made to signify the absent body and 
blood of Christ, but that the bread and wine, for the sake 
of sacramental union, are the true body and blood of 
Christ." It is useless to cite more Symbolical author- 
ity, to prove that the body in which our Saviour was 
incarnate upon earth constitutes the Real Presence in 
the Sacrament. It suffices to repeat that this body no 
longer exists, but has been superseded by Christ's 
glorified body, and that, as it is a universally recog- 
nized axiom in natural philosophy, to which all bodies, 
however subtile or dense, must yield, '' that it is im- 
possible for the same thing to be and not to be at the 
same time" ; therefore, I hold that the crucified body 
of Christ, long since decomposed into its elementary 
constituents, and supplanted by a body, to the func- 
tions of which it was no longer competent, can have 
no existence in the Lord's Supper, in its normal organic 
state, or in any state responding to a personal humanity ; 
and hence a real presence, in the accepted sense, can 
have no existence, except in imagination, or, perhaps, 
a fondness for antithesis. 



68 THE DOCTRINE OF 

' PARAGRAPH II. 

The Ubiquity or Omuipresenco of Chfist's Glorified Ikxiy. 

Having treated of the spiritual eating of the bless- 
ings resulting from the death of Christ, or their appro- 
priation by faith, in a general way, the authors of the 
Form of Concord, p. 597, speak of the eating and 
drinking of the body and blood of Christ as an oral or 
sacramental eating and drinking, and then continue 
thus to expatiate on the subject: "In the Lord's 
Supper," they assert, " the true and essential body and 
blood of Christ are received by the believer, as a pledge 
and assurance that his sins are most certainly forgiven, 
and that Christ dwells in him and imparts to him his 
grace. The Saviour's commandment, when he dis- 
tributed the symbols of bread and wine to his disciples, 
and called them, in the literal sense of the terms, bis 
body and his blood, 'To eat and drink,' cannot have 
meant anything but an oral eating and drinking, 
though not a gross, carnal, Capernaitic* eating and 
drinking, but an eating and drinking in a supernatural 
and incompreliensible manner," etc. 

What strikes one very forcibly here is, that the oral 
eating and drinking of the body and blood of Christ 
are declared not to be a gross, carnal, Capernaitic 
eating and drinking, but a supernatural and incompre- 

'■'^ This Capernaitic eating and drinking of tho Lord's Supper, I 
shall ])rovo iu tho sei[Uol to bo an cininciUli/ npiritual eating and 
driukiusr. 



TEE LORD'S SUPPER. 69 

hensible eating, and drinking. Now, if it is incompre- 
hensible, in what way is its meaning ascertained by 
the believers in the Real Presence ? And again, if it 
is incomprehensible, how can they, with any sense of 
justice or propriety, censure or condemn those who' 
entertain views on this subject different from their 
own ? Christ — as I have shown all along — certainly 
teaches no such sacramental enigma. Then again, to 
receive the body and blood of Christ into the mouth, 
eat it, drink it, swallow it, digest it, and do all this, not 
in a natural and appreciable, but in a supernatural and 
incomprehensible manner, without being conscious of 
it, is a most glaring outrage against the common sense 
of the communicant. I would not deal harshly with 
the memory of men who, as Reformers, notwithstand- 
ing the incompleteness and partial defects of their la- 
bors, deserve, for the vast deal of good they have done, 
the profound gratitude of posterity ; yet I am under log- 
ical and moral necessity to avow — without intending 
the least disrespect in so doing towards dissenting 
brethren — that the doctrine of the Real Presence, in 
the Lord's Supper, is the most extravagant chimera 
that the human mind has ever devised, to mystify and 
perplex a plain, nay, in fact, a self-evident truth ! It 
is not possible that God can take pleasure in the origi- 
nation and propagation of error, and an error, too, of 
so grave and pernicious a character, when a simple, 
universally recognized principle of interpretation can 
alone be adequate to declare his will and illustrate our 
duty. 

Some of the principal arguments assigned in the 



70 



THE DOCTRINE OF 



Form of Concord, p. 499, for the reasonableness and 
practicability of the Real Presence, in the Lord's 
Supper, of Christ's glorified body, I shall here intro- 
duce to the reader's notice, and in so doing enable him 
to judge of their cogency as well as prepare him prop- 
erly to appreciate the scope, and pertinence of the pres- 
ent disquisition: "Having entered into his glory, the 
Lord Jesus Christ knows all things, not only as God, 
but as man ; possesses all power ; is omnipresent to all 
creatures ; and holds, as he himself assures us, all things 
in heaven, on earth, and under the earth, in subjection: 
'AH power is given to me in heaven and on earth.' 
And St. Paul declares that, ' He that descended is 
the same that ascended up far above all heavens, that 
he might fill all thing.s,' Ephesians, iv. 10. Hence 
he possesses the power to communicate his true body 
and blood in the Lord's Supper, not according to the 
peculiarities of the human, but according to the pecu- 
liarities of the Divine nature." 

The substance of the foregoing communication is, 
that Jesus, though still God-man, possesses absolute 
Divinity, and thus continues, notwithstanding his hypo- 
static connection with humanity, to be omniscient, 
omnipresent, and almighty, and that— such being the 
case— his glorified body is necessarily capable of the 
most facile and unbounded ubiquity. If this statement 
was true, it would be ea.^y to account for the Ileal 
Presence, under the symbols of bread and wine, in the 
Sacrament, provided it could be demonstrated that a 
body, however subtile it may be, is exempt from the 
laws of matter, and therefore independent of finiteness 



THE LORD'S SUPPER. Yl 

or space ; but as it is taught that the glorified body of 
Christ has still flesh and blood, or the attributes of in- 
violate humanity, and, indeed, must have, to answer to 
the words of the institution. This is my body, this is 
my blood, etc., it still more plainly and certainly follows 
that the glorified body of Christ is no more endowed 
with the attribute of ubiquity than was his earthly 
body. But I shall now proceed to show that the 
glorified body of Christ is totally different from his 
crucified or primeval body. 

In the Epistle of Paul to the Philippians, iii. 21, we 
are told that Christ "-shall change our vile body, that 
it may be fashioned like unto his glorious bod}^," etc. 
In view of such positive teaching as this is, can any 
one longer doubt that the glorified body of Christ, 
however excellent and ethereal it may be, cannot have 
ubiquitous properties? Our bodies shall be hereafter 
like his glorified body. But, I may be allowed to ob- 
serve, that our bodies must still be the bodies of finite 
beings, and therefore restricted in their mobility ; and 
as they are to be like the Saviour's glorified body, the 
Saviour's glorified body must be likewise of limited 
presence, and cannot possibly be ubiquitous in the 
Lord's Supper, or simultaneously in widely separate 
and innumerable places. But as the Real Presence is 
affirmed to be a presence of flesh and blood. This is 
my body, this is my blood, etc., I will now call atten- 
tion to the fact that Christ's glorified body has neither 
flesh nor blood. 

In 1 Corinthians, xv. 50, we find the apostolic com- 
munication on this subject couched in these decisive 



72 THE DOCTRINE OF 

words: •' Xow this I say, brethren, that flesh and 
blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth 
corruption inherit incorruption." Such authoritative 
teaching clears up, one should think, the whole matter, 
even to the conviction of the most ultra ubiquitarian ; 
for where there is no flesh and blood, as component 
parts of Christ's glorified body, there cannot, on any 
principle of correct reasoning, be a real bodily presence 
of his glorified humanity: from nothing, nothing is! 
There is, it seems, still one more fact needed to put 
this question forever, I trust, at rest, and this we have 
presented to us, in a most triumphant form, as well as 
force of expression, in Luke, xxiv. 3G-40 : " And as 
they thus spake, Jesus himself stood in the midst of 
them, and saith unto them, Peace be iinto you. But 
they were terrified and affrighted, and supposed that 
they had seen a spirit. And he said unto them, Why 
are ye troubled ? and why do thoughts arise in your 
hearts ? Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I my- 
self: handle me, and see ; for a spirit hath not flesh and 
bones, as ye see me have. And when he had thus 
spoken, he showed them his hands and his feet." 

It appears from the purport of the preceding pas- 
sage, that Jesus, suddenly presenting himself among 
his disciples, they mistook him for a spirit, and were, 
accordingly, much aflVightcd ; and that, to undeceive 
them, our Lord called attention to two important cir- 
cumstances, forcibly elucidative of some of the princi- 
ples of psychology, namely, that " a spirit hath not flesh 
and bones," as they saw him have; and that a spirit — 
an inhal)itant of the celestial world — cannot be seen 



THE LORD'S SUPPER. Y3 

and handled. This plain, solemn Christ-teaching ought 
to satisfy every impartial and intelligent person that 
the body of Christ" in heaven is so entirely different 
from the body of Christ on earth that the doctrine of 
the Real Presence can no longer pretend to a sem- 
blance of a Scripture basis, or a just claim to the 
serious attention of mankind. Indeed, the bulwark of 
Old Lutheranism, the Warthurg of its churchly 
strength and hope, can, it appears, hardly hold out 
much longer, unless it adopts, as I fondly hope it may, 
a different plan of defense I 

PARAGRAPH III. 

Christ sits on the Right Haud of God, and, therefore, his Glorified Body must, 
say the Advocates of a Real Presence, possess Ubiquity. 

Agreeably to the Form of Concord, " Cod's right 
hand is synonymous with omnipresence, and Christ, 
though sitting on the right hand of Cod, as Cod-man, 
nevertheless reigns over all things, and enjoys a rank 
or pre-eminence to which neither man nor angel can 
attain." Numerous passages of Scripture, treating of 
this interesting and absorbing subject, speak of the 
Saviour as '' sitting on the right hand of Cod" ; as 
" stariding in the midst of the throne"; as "ascending 
up where he was before" ; as " coming to the Father" ; 
as *' being received up into heaven, and sitting on the 
right hand of Cod"; as "ascending to his Father and 
our Father, to his Cod and our Cod," etc. 

The doctrine advanced in the above-cited passage 
from the Form of Concord, which is said essentially 

7 



74 TEE DOCTRINE OF 

to express Luther's views on the subject, is entirely 
conformable to the usual ideas which an enlightened 
mind entertains of God, considered as the absolute 
Deity, possessing the exalted attributes of infinity and 
omnipotence.* This exalted and adorable Being has, 
of course, no throne ; does not sit ; has no right hand, 
etc. ; and Jesus — our gracious and magnanimous Re- 
deemer — cannot, therefore, stand in the midst of the 
throne, or sit on the right hand of God. Such senti- 
ments and expressions are simply anthi^opomoiyhisms, 
to which a wise teacher will now and then adapt him- 
self, or, in other words, the language of man in a rude 
state of society, whose God is the image or reflection 
of himself, possessing manners and observing practices 
similar to his own. 

To sit on tbe right hand of God, therefore, as Christ 
is said to do, can only mean to possess a rank imply- 
ing exceedingly great glory, honor, and power ; such 
glory, honor, and power, however, as are compatible 
with the relation and functions intermediate between 
a perfect Godliood, on the one hand, and a perfect 
manhood on the other. Hence the idea of Luther 
that Christ, as Logos or Son of God, in his hypostatic 

* Whether God is omnipresent in the infinitude of his being, or is 
omnipresent only in the operations of his laws, and therefore 
governs the world agreeably to these laws, which must, of course, 
be fixed and immutable, I do not pretend positively to decide, but 
incline to the latter idea, which requires man to humble himself 
before the Almighty, and learn his will, instead of dictating to him, 
and continuing in idleness, exclaiming, in the pithy language of the 
Proverbs, "Yet a little sleep, a little slumber, a little folding of the 
hands to sleep." 



THE LORD'S SUPPER. t5 

connection with humanity, can be, like the Father, 
everywhere present, or has absolute ubiquity, cannot 
be entertained for a moment, and I shall only add 
that I have already amply proved this hypothesis to 
be untenable, both from the laws of matter and from 
the similitude of our bodies with Christ's body in the 
celestial state, and shown that if our bodies shall be like 
his, as is emphatically taught,— it must follow that as 
we, being finite beings, cannot inhabit ubiquitous bodies, 
— his body must, consequently, also possess but local 
presence, or, in other words, be subject to mobility. 
But while I deem it unnecessary to go over ground 
already pretty thoroughly explored, I shall furnish a 
few more arguments from relevant sources, varying 
somewhat from the preceding more in traits of illustra- 
tion than in novelty of matter, and supplying, in some 
degree, new and interesting exhibitions of facts, as well 
as additional force of evidence upon the subject. 

These arguments thus characterized, though other 
Scriptures of equal cogency bearing upon the ques- 
tion might readily be cited, are based upon the follow- 
ing texts in the Gospel according to John : xii. 26, xiv. 
2-4; and xvii. 24, which contain most welcome words, 
pregnant with profound thoughts, and conveying at 
once instruction and comfort to the devout and docile 
Christian : "If any man serve me, let him follow me ; 
and where I am, there shall also my servant be," etc. 
"In my Father's house are many mansions : if it were 
not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place 
for you. And if I go and prepare a place for you, I 
will come again, and receive you unto myself; that 



76 THE DOCTRINE OF 

where I am, there ye may be also. And whither I go 
ye know, and the way ye know." "Father, I will 
that they also, whom thou hast given me, be with me 
where I am; that they may behold my glory, which 
thou hast given me," etc. 

In this interesting portion of Divine revelation, con- 
cerning the Christian's future existence and abode, the 
Saviour invites attention to the facts — which must be 
of paramount interest to the heavenward-bound pil- 
grim — that the victorious Christians shall hereafter be 
where their Lord is ; that our Lord has prepared a 
place for them, and will come and receive them unto 
himself— in the place prepared for them ; and that they 
shall then have an opportunity to behold the glory 
conferred upon him by the Father. 

Judging from this important and most gratifying 
intelligence, it is evident that not only the future, re- 
deemed man shall occupy a distinct abode, — a place in 
the Father's house, especially prepared for him by his 
Saviour, — but that the Saviour himself will occupy it 
with him, for his prayer is, " That those whom the 
Father has given him might be where he is." Hence as 
the Christian, a finite creature, is hereafter to share an 
abode in common with his Lord, though he is clearly in 
a condition which renders him incapable of ubiquity, 
being confined to place, it follows that our Lord, being 
similarly confined, must likewise be non-ubiquitous, 
he being, according to his own Divine teaching, a 
fellow-inmate of the same exalted and Klysiau locality, 
the Father's house, and, therefore, evidently not in a 
state admiltiug of ubiquity. 



THE LORD'S SUPPER. Yt 



THE LORD'S SUPPER IS A MEMORIAL. 



CHAPTER I. 

Christ our Passover. 

The renowned anniversary institution among the 
Jews, denominated the Passover, was a divinely-ap- 
pointed feast or sacred festival, whose origin, accord- 
ing to Professor Lepsius, the eminent archasologist, is 
traceable on the hoary page of history to the remote 
era, dating back thirteen centuries anterior to the birth 
of Christ. Its celebration, which was at once solemn 
and magnificent, occurred about the time of the ver- 
nal equinox, the season of nature's rejuvenescence in 
Palestine, and was accompanied with sacred rites and 
joyous demonstrations. The important object which 
was designed to be attained in its institution was, 
" To commemorate," writes the learned lexicogra- 
pher. Dr. Webster, "the providential escape of the 
Hebrews in Egypt, when God, smiting the first-born 
of the Egyptians, passed over the houses of the Israel- 
ites, which were marked with the blood of the paschal 
lamb." 



»J8 THE DOCTRINE OF 

The paschal lamb was selected by Providence as a 
suitable sacrificial offering on the momentous event 
which resulted in the deliverance of the Jews from a 
protracted and cruel bondage in the land of the Pha- 
raohs, as exuberant in fertility as it was illustrious in 
arts and sciences ; and it was through means of its 
blood, now become eminently precious, and of national 
significance, properly and seasonably applied — that the 
chosen people of Jehovah were taught to avert the 
doom which awaited the obstinate and chastised the 
guilty Egyptians. 

That the Jewish passover was typical of Christ, and 
that Christ must, therefore, possess pas soverial func- 
tions, is the repeated and express teaching of the Xew 
Testament. Whence it follows that, as ''the Lamb of 
God, that taketh away the sins of the world," John, i. 
29, Christ is the paschal lamb of the Xew Testament, 
whose blood is designed to save not a single nation 
merely, but a whole world "lying in wickedness." 
This, indeed, salient fact is generally rather insinuated 
than expressed, premised oftener than proved or illus- 
trated ; yet the Gospel furnishes testimony on this sub- 
ject which amply sustains the proposition, that Christ 
is indeed our passover. 

The first passage which contains a positive state- 
ment to this effect, and to which attention is here in- 
vited, is that in 1 Corinthians, v. 7, where the apostle, 
in true paschal style of preparation for the celebration 
of " the feast of unleavened bread," exhorts his readers 
to purge out the old leiWen, that they might be' a 
new lump, " For," continues he, " even Christ our pass- 



THE LORD'S SUPPER. 19 

over is sacrificed for us." This text, though concise, is 
lucid and directly to the point, and not only recalls to 
mind the passover-festival and the customs of the Jews, 
observed preparatory to its celebration, but it also un- 
mistakably conveys the weighty idea, that Christ is 
foreshadowed or represented by that ancient and ven- 
erable Jewish festival : Exodus, xii. 15. 
• If, now, we compare the peculiarities by which the 
paschal lamb was required, by the Divine lawgiver, 
to be distinguished, in order to be suitably qualified 
for so sacred and important a purpose, or the conduct 
which was to be carefully observed towards it at the 
festival-board, with the corresponding traits apper- 
taining to Christ, our paschal sacrifice, or similar for- 
bearance manifested towards him on the cross, we 
shall not hesitate to recognize a decided typical con- 
nection. Having enjoined, Exodus, xii. 46, that the 
paschal lamb, in its individual distribution, appropri- 
ated either to a single family, sufficiently numerous, or 
divided among several households of the required 
number. Exodus, xii. 4, should be consumed by the 
participants, within the limits of the domicile dedicated 
to the festive solemnity, and that no part of it should 
be " carried abroad," the celestial legislator adds : 
'' Neither shall ye break a bone thereof." In Numbers, 
ix. 12, the prohibition, not to break a bone of the 
passover-lamb, is repeated, and thus, consequently, 
increased force and significance added to it by the 
repetition. These passages find their antitype in the 
Gospel recorded in John, xix. 32, 33, 36, and are thus 
admirably illustrated : " Then came the soldiers, and 



80 THE DOCTRINE OF 

brake the legs of the first, and of the other which was 
crucified with him. But when they came to Jesus, and 
saw that he was dead ah*eady, they brake not his legs : 
for these things were done, that the scripture should 
be fullilled, A bone of him shall not be broken." 

To be properly fitted for the passover-oCfering, the 
paschal lamb had to be " a male of the first year," a 
male a year old, and " without blemish." (Exodus, xit. 
5.) The exact similitude to this requirement, if we 
except the age of the lamb, is at once recognized in 
the description of Christ, our iiassover, given by St. 
Paul in his Epistle to the Hebrews, ix. 13, 14: "If 
the blood of bulls and of goats, and the ashes of an 
heifer sprinkling the unclean, sauctifieth to the puri- 
fying of the Qesh : how much more shall the blood or 
Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself 
without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead 
works to serve the living God?" If, now, we advert 
to the First Epistle of Peter, i. 18-19, we shall find an 
ascription, though somewhat amplified, of paschal at- 
tributes to Christ, essentially corresponding to the pre- 
ceding quotation : " Ye know that ye were not re- 
deemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold, 
from your vain conversation received by tradition 
from your fathers; but with the precious blood of 
Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot.^^ 
From all these instances of a close agreement of cir- 
cumstances and identicalness of design, between type 
and antitype, it is evident that Christ is to mankind 
what the paschal lamb was to the Jews, and that he 
is emphatically our passover. 



THE LORD'S SUPPER. 81 

I shall next proceed indisputably to establish the 
fact, that the Jewish passover was a memorial, or, in 
other words, that it expressed mnemonic design, and 
for this purpose simply refer to Exodus, xii. 25-27 ; 
" And it shall come to pass, when ye be come to the 
land which the Lord will give you, according as he 
hath promised, that ye shall keep this service. And it 
shall come to pass, when your children shall say unto 
you, What mean ye by this service ? that ye shall 
say, It is the sacrifice of the Lord's passover, who 
passed over the houses of the children of Israel in 
Egypt, when he smote the Egyptians, and delivered 
our houses." Here the inquiry of the successive gen- 
erations of Hebrew posterity, about the meaning of 
the paschal rite, finds solution in reminiscence, which 
addresses itself to the memory as a great and solemn 
fact living in history; and each time the Jews cele- 
brated the passover, they did it in remembrance of the 
momentous event which resulted in the emancipation 
from* Egyptian servitude. Hence the Lord's Supper, 
being pre-eminently our passover-festival, is likewise a 
memorial, — that is, it is commemorative of the stupen- 
dous act in the vicarious life of Christ, culminating in 
the death of the cross, in our emancipation from sin, 
and death, and hell. 

These most striking facts I shall bring out more 
prominently, in a comparison of the words in Exodus, 
xii. 11 : '' And ye shall eat it in haste ; it is the Lord's 
passover," with those of our Lord in the words of the 
sacramental institution, " Take, eat, — this bread ; — this 
is my body." Now the words, It is the Lord's passover, 



82 THE DOCTRINE OF 

cannot mean that the paschal feast which the Jews 
were urged to eat in haste was the passover itself, in a 
literal sense, for in the words which immediately follow 
we read : " For I will pass through the land of Egypt 
this night,-' etc. Hence the paschal feast, to be eaten 
in haste, was not literally, but only in a metonymic 
sense, the passover, while the Lord only was the real 
passover ; for it was " he that passed through the laud 
of Egypt, and smote all its first-born both of man and 
beast," and his will that expressed itself in the enact- 
ment, " The blood shall be to you for a token upon the 
houses where you are : and where I see the blood, I 
icill pass over youy etc. Of this terrible, punitive act 
of the Lord, on the one hand, and of his signal mercy 
on the other, the passover-feast, which was to be eaten 
in haste, was merely a memorial, and, therefore, the 
phrase, It is the Lord's passover, is elliptical, and 
means that it denotes, signifies, or represents the Lord's 
twofold passage, bearing alternatively punishment or 
blessing in its train, through the guilt-stained- land 
of Egypt. Xo Jew, with ordinary intelligence, could 
possibly have understood it otherwise, or could have 
been stupid enough to think that he was eating the 
Lord himself, who only was, properly speaking, the 
passover, and of whose passover the Jewish feast was 
simply a yearly, hebdomadal, and reminiscent celebra- 
tion. Now, who is so blind as not to perceive a most 
palpable and striking likeness between the injunction, 
Eat in haste ; it is the Lord's passover, and the words, 
Take, eat ; this is my body ? If the former is mne- 
monic in its design, as is certain beyond a shadow of 



THE LORD'S SUFFER. 83 

a doubt, the latter must be so too, for they are essen- 
tially the same in import as well as in phraseology, 
and alike celebrate -momentous soterial events, which 
are facts boldly standing out in history, and can be 
known and appreciated only through the historic chan- 
nel of memory. I therefore feel myself amply war- 
ranted in assuming the position that the words, 
This is my body, etc., affirmed of the sacramental 
bread, have the sense of mean, denote, symbolize, my 
body, etc., and can no more be taken literally, or inter- 
preted to imply an actual eating of the body and blood 
of the Lord Jesus Christ, than the words. Eat in haste ; 
it — the paschal feast — is the Lord's passover, and 
thus made to imply the eating of Jehovah! I add, 
that when human devices assume so extravagant and 
appalling a character as to make it necessary to point 
out, at once, their absurdity and dangerous tendency, 
it seems to become incumbent on an author to employ 
language which may wear the semblance of irrever- 
ence, without, howevei", a remote intention that such 
should be the case, and which is, therefore, to be attrib- 
uted to the urgency of the occasion, or the desperate 
nature of the subject. 



84 THE DOCTRINE OF 



CHAPTER II. 

Christ, the Founder of the New Testament. 

In eutering upon the subject of the present chapter, 
we meet with new, and, I conceive, forcible arguments 
in favor of the position advanced in these sheets, and 
carrying with them overwhelming- evidence against the 
tenableness and even plausibility of the doctrine of the 
Real Presence. Attention is called, in the first place, 
to the term ci/p in the Lord's Supper. Of it, our Lord 
says, " Drink ye all of it ; for this is my blood of the 
New Testament," etc. Here we meet with a repeti- 
tion of the rhetoric figure called metonymy, which has 
the distinguisliiug peculiarity that it substitutes one 
word for another. Thus, the cup cannot be " the blood 
of the New Testament," as it is simply a chalice or 
sacramental vessel, designed to convey the wine to the 
communicants ; nor can we " drink of it," for we 
neither do nor can drink cups of any sort, whether 
sacred or profane. Clearly, then, the name cup here 
is the substitute for the wine in the cup: this people 
can and do drink; and this must, therefore, have been 
meant when the disciples were requested by our Lord, 
agreeably to a rhetoric trope, to drink of the cup. But 
even the wine itself is a metonymy ; for it can no more 
be Christ's blood than the cup, but is a substitute in 
the Syriac language, in which the Saviour spoke when 
he instituted the Lord's Supper, for such phrase as the 



TEE LORD'S SUPPER. 85 

following: this signifies, this represents, etc., my blood. 
This exposition, it really seeros, ought to be regarded 
and hailed as plain, natural, true, nay, self-evident, by 
every intelligent and truth-loving mind. 

If now we pass in review the words of the sacra- 
mental institution, in reference to the bread, we shall 
find that Jesus designated it as his body, and hence 
discover a striking analogy, both of expression and 
import, between the bread, the cup, and the wine; and 
as the latter are tropes, — shown to be such, — and gen- 
erally instinctively taken as such by the majority of 
mankind, being not literally what they are affirmed to 
be, but what they figuratively imply to be, it follows 
that the former — the bread — must be interpreted in the 
same way, and mean, not what it is ostensibly affirmed 
to be, but what it signifies or represents. Nor, I pre- 
sume, can it be deemed an easier matter to eat the real 
body of our Lord, in the hostia or consecrated wafer, 
than to drink of the cup ; the one being fully as in- 
comprehensible and impracticable as the other. 

As, therefore, the cup denotes the wine, and the 
wine the blood of Christ, shed or poured out for us, 
" for the remission of sins," in founding the New-Testa- 
ment scheme or economy of grace, so the bread denotes 
the body of Christ, given for us ; and both the bread and 
the cup or the wine are incidents or conditions in the 
same paramount proposition, that Christ is about to 
die for us, and thus, in his death, to give his body and 
shed his blood sacrificially in our behalf, as essential 
to the plan to institute the New Testament dispensa- 
tion, and hence to open the way of salvation to sin- 



86 THE D OCT RISE OF 

fill, heaven-destined man. Such being the fact in the 
ease, the body and the blood of Christ are to be soaght 
and found on the cross, whither, accordingly, the 
Lord's Supper points our faith and our hope, and 
where only the eucharistic commemoration of the ex- 
piatory Christ-sacrifice can softly and safely lay our 
weary, fainting souls in the mercy-breathing bosom of 
the great Redeemer. I will only further remark here, 
that the important theme of the mnemonic feature in 
the Lord's Supper — at once so singularly expressive 
and prominent — will be briefly resumed in the sequel 
of this chapter. 

In the treatment of the present subject, it will be 
necessary to direct our inquiry with more immediate 
reference to ''the blood of the Xew Testament" 
In making .contracts or covenants, especially of a 
solemn, religious character, it was anciently the prac- 
tice, both among Jews and Gentiles, to ratify them 
with the blood of sacrificial victims. The staining of 
the posts and lintels of the doors of the Hebrew 
houses, with the blood of the paschal lamb, was simply 
the seal and symbol of a sacred contract between Je- 
hovah and the Chosen People, the meaning of which 
was: if you thus use the blood of the paschal lamb 
as you have been directed, you shall be saved ; but if 
you do not use it thus, the appalling and inevitable 
fate of the doomed Egyptians will await you ! 

With a view further to illustrate and confirm this 
interesting subject, on which hinges so much valuable 
exegesis, attention is invited to Exodus, xxiv. 1-8, 
where we find the record of a covenant or testament 



THE LORD'S SUPPER. 8Y 

made between God and the Jewish people. Having 
been intrusted by Jehovah with the terms and object 
of the covenant which he was about to establish with 
the Israelites, Moses descended from the craggy heights 
of Mount Sinai, and appearing among the people, who 
were anxiously, perhaps impatiently, awaiting his re- 
turn, he told them " all the words of the Lord, and 
all the judgments : and all the people answered with 
one voice, and said, All the words which the Lord 
hath said will we do. And Moses wrote all the 
words of the Lord, and rose up early in the morning, 
and builded an altar under the hill, and twelve pillars, 
according to the twelve tribes of Israel. And he sent 
young men of the children of Israel, which offered burnt- 
offerings, and sacrificed peace-offerings of oxen unto the 
Lord. And Moses took half of the blood, and put it in 
basins ; and half of the blood he sprinkled on the altar. 
And he took the book of the covenant, and read in the 
audience of the people : and they said, All that the 
Lord hath said will we do, and be obedient. And 
Moses took the blood, and sprinkled it on the people, 
and said. Behold the blood of the covenant, which the 
Lord hath made with you concerning all these words." 
In the Epistle to the Hebrews, ix. 19-22, we find a 
concise statement of the extensive range and signifi- 
cant import of this ancient and impressive custom, 
especially verified by reference to Jewish history, and 
hence learn still further, that contracts or covenants 
were ordinarily hallowed and confirmed as late even as 
the first century of the Christian era through the in- 
strumentality of blood : the blood denoting, at the same 



88 THE DOCTRINE OF 

time, as has been already stated, that the party in the 
contract that should break or violate the conditions of 
the covenant, which it was possible only for the Israel- 
ites, the weaker and peccant party of the contracting 
powers, to do, should fare no better than the slaugh- 
tered victim whose blood was spilled on the solemn 
occasion. " When Moses," thus writes the sacred his- 
torian, '* had spoken every precept to all the people 
according to the law, he took the blood of calves and 
of goats, with water, and scarlet wool, and hyssop, and 
sprinkled both the book, and all the people, saying, 
This is the blood of the testament which God hath 
enjoined unto you. Moreover he sprinkled with blood 
both the tabernacle, and all the vessels of the ministry. 
And almost all things are by the law purged with 
blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission." 

jS'ow, it was substantially in conformity to this He- 
brew custom that Christ instituted the New Testa- 
ment ; that, to render it valid, he died, ay, gave his 
body and shed his blood, " to cleanse us from all sin" ; 
that all that should faithfully observe the conditions of 
the contract thus entered into with the Saviour should 
be saved ; but that all, on the contrary, that should re- 
ject or violate it, should forfeit their interest in his 
vicarious death, and perish miserably, without the pale 
and without the hope of redemption. 

A main question, therefore, arises. In what way or 
with what sentiments ought we to celebrate this ex- 
piatory or vicarious death of our Lord when we gather 
around the sacramental table ? The Symbolist brother 
confidently replies, We celebrate it worthily, in fact, in 



THE LORD'S SUPPER. 89 

the only worthy and eminently proper way, if we par- 
take orally of the Saviour's body and blood in, with, 
and under the external signs of bread and wine ! Not 
thus, I am thoroughly persuaded, teaches the Lord 
Jesus Christ. On the contrary, he says, Luke xxii. 
19, "This is my body," — denotes my body: ^Uliis do 
in reinemhrance of mey Clearly, then, the Lord's 
Supper is to be regarded as a memorial rite, and must, 
accordingly, be chiefly, though, as I shall show here- 
after, not exclusively, valued as a mnemonic institu- 
tion. Confirmatory of these views, both apparently as 
scriptural as they are reasonable, St. Paul writes, 1 
Corinthians, xi. 23-26, That he had received his in- 
formation on the subject of the institution and design 
of the Lord's Supper " of the Lord," — evidently imply- 
ing that it was by a special revelation. And what does 
the Lord say to the Apostle communicants should 
sedulously aim to impress upon their minds when they 
devoutly participate in the solemn sacramental feast ? 
I answer. That Christ's body was broken — on the cross, 
of course — for them, or, in other words, that the Saviour 
died for them, and that they should diligently and rev- 
erently observe two things in reference to this impor- 
tant fact, both whenever they came together to cele- 
brate the Lord's Supper and while they lived : first, 
remember that Christ died for them, and humbly and 
immovably obey his sacred injunction, '' Do this in re- 
membrance of me"; '' This do ye, as often as ye drink 
it, in remembrance of me" ; and secondly, that, " As 
often as we eat this bread^'' — not the Saviour's veritable 
body and blood — "and drink this cup," we should "show 

8* 



90 THE DOCTRINE OF 

the Lord's death'' — proclaim it to the world — " till he 
come." To sum up, in a few words, the pith and drift 
of this very opportune Pauline communication of a 
Divine and special revelation to the Christian Church, 
on the proper nature and design of the Lord's Supper, 
I may state that its language is at once simple and 
easily understood ; that it cannot but prove satisfac- 
tory and convincing to the candid searcher after truth; 
and that, finally, as must be evident to even an 
ordinary understanding, it possesses the inappreciable 
advantage as well as the delightful assurance to have 
the approbation of God and the triumph of truth on 
its side. 



THE LORD'S SUPPER. 91 



THE LORD'S SUPPER, beside being a COMlMEMORATIVE 
ORDINANCE, is also a MEANS OF GRACE. 



That the Lord's Supper is eminently a commemo- 
rative rite I have clearly shown, I think, in the im- 
mediately preceding chapters, both from the natural 
purport of its language and the plain object of its in- 
stitution. It being, as is demonstrable, as a Christian 
rite, a kind of parting memento affectionately confided 
by Christ to his followers, — a sacred keepsake, virtu- 
ally, inscribed with the parting words of the Saviour- 
friend, Forget me not I That it is, however, at the 
same time exceedingly well adapted to promote the 
paramount interests of a pious and holy life, in the 
sincere and zealous believer, there can be no reason- 
able doubt. It is peculiarly fitted to carry back the 
exercise of memory on the rapid wings of time to the 
tragic scenes enacted on the cross, where Christ, ex- 
piring, impressed the blood-stained seal of hope and 
pardon — theaign-manual of his kingdom — on the Magna 
Charta of his world-redemption : the wonder and 
glory of the love of God to man. While thus the 
agonies and death of Christ are recalled vividly to the 
mind of the communicant, the Sacrament awakens in 
it the most profound gratitude towards the gracious 



92 THE DOCTRnSE OF 

and magQanimoLis Redeemer. It seasonably brings 
home to us in a most pertinent and forcible manner, 
while surrounding the sacramental table, the signifi- 
cant fact, that we all have urgent need of a Saviour; 
that the Saviour has died for all, irrespective of person 
or race ; and that, in the sight of God, we are thus 
far, at least, equal, and should, therefore, love each 
other with the sincere affection of a common Christian 
brotherhood. Besides, the hearts of the communicants 
— under the holy and blessed sacramental influence — 
are melted with devotional fervor ; the affections 
drawn out and sanctified ; and the soul, being in effect 
now happily laid open, it is suitably prepared for gra- 
cious Divine influences, thus emphatically receiving 
the comfort and encouragement which Christians so 
greatly need to a successful prosecution of their high 
and holy vocation, while their faith is rekindled and 
strengthened, and the hope of everlasting life, together 
with the assurance of the Divine favor, lives and 
flourishes with renewed and ever-increasing vigor in 
their upward-bound souls, sanctified and blessed of 
God. Animated by such views, and governed by senti- 
ments like these. Professor S. S. Schmucker, in his 
"Elements of Popular Theology," writes thus of the 
Lord's Supper as a means of grace : " The Lord's 
Supper is a symbolic and affecting exhibition of the 
facts of the atoning death of the Son of God, and of 
the various momentously interesting relations of that 
death to the moral government of the world and the 
salvation of sinners. Nor arc these truths any the less 
afloctiuiT, when these outward ordinances — the Lord's 



THE LORD'S SUPPER. 93 

Supper and Baptism — are the signs by which they are 
presented to the mind, than when described in words." 

The views here expressed by this eminent divine, I 
venture to remark, agree essentially with my own, nor 
are they less accordant with those advanced by the 
learned and eloquent Mosheim, in his '' Ecclesiastical 
History," etc., when treating of the rites and ceremo- 
nies used in the Christian Church during the first cen- 
tury : "The rites instituted by Christ himself," he 
assures us, '' were only two in number, and these were 
designed to continue to the end of the Church here 
below, without any variation. These rites were bap- 
tism and the holy supper, which are not to be consid- 
ered as mere ceremonies, nor yet as symbolical repre- 
sentations only, but also as ordinances accompanied 
with a sanctifying influence upon the heart and the 
affections of true Christians," etc.* 

Of faith and repentance I shall not speak here, as 
they are universally admitted to rank pre-eminently 
among the means of grace, emphatically of saving 
grace too, and to be in respect to human agency in 
redemption what the death of the Saviour — its Divine, 
supernatural element, is — a sine qua non, or, in other 
words, an indispensable condition. Though the Lord's 
Supper is especially instrumental in procuring for us 



* It was not until some time in the second century of the Chris- 
tian Church, according to Mosheim, that the notion that the Lord's 
Supper was a saving ordinance began to develop itself to any con- 
siderable extent. That notion was, therefore, sacramentally consid- 
ered, abnormal and repugnant to the plain letter of the eucharistic 
institution, and, of course, merits no further attention in this place. 



94 THE DOCTRINE OF 

rich and varied Diviue blessiugs, and hence peculiarly 
efiBcient as a means of grace, I may observe that, in 
the enlarged sense of the term, every rite or institu- 
tion claiming a scriptural origin, and thus having the 
Divine sanction, is suited to be promotive of the at- 
tainment of Christian graces or heavenly gifts : as the 
use of prayer, psalmody, reading the Scriptures, at- 
tendance on homiletic instruction, etc. Providential 
visitations too, manifested in strikingly adverse or pros- 
perous events, are often powerful and very enduring 
means of grace, constraining the impenitent to reflect 
and pause in their wild and headlong career, and to 
ask. What must we do to be saved ? or filling the pious 
soul with unspeakable joy and gratitude, under a lively 
sense of the great and unmerited goodness of God. For 
every agency of the kind here pointed out, or implied, 
is well adapted to spiritual instruction, edification, and 
improvement, while, at the same time, it facilitates the 
acquirement of a frame of mind, properly prepared for 
the benign influences of the Holy Spirit, that at once 
enlightens, renews, and sanctifies the heart, and thus 
efi't'Ctually restrains and preserves it from sin and its 
allurements. 

Though Christ is not bodily present in the Lord's 
Supper, as I have shown and shall still continue to 
show, is he not present at all, thus rendering this 
ordinance a more thorough and efi'ectual means of 
grace, conferring blessings far greater than it can 
otherwise do ? Yes, he is present in the Lord's Sup- 
per, though in a pre-eminent degree, as he is present 
in all heaven-appointed means of grace, and, therefore, 



THE LORD'S SUPPER. 95 

in a manner similar to his promised presence with his 
followers, or, in other words, with his Chnrch. (Mat- 
thew xxviii. 20:) Wherever his word is, or his 
Sacraments are, or wherever any of the. scripturally 
appointed or approved ordinances are properly ad- 
ministered, there is he, manifesting himself through 
the inherent moral power of these select vehicles of 
Divine grace and approval. Hence, as I am under 
necessity, in virtue of honest, conscientious convic- 
tions, peremptorily to reject the dogma of the Real 
Presence, I feel myself likewise constrained, in con- 
sequence of its decided unscripturalness, most em- 
phatically to protest against the sacramental doctrine of 
a mystic or supernatural presence considered as some- 
thing altogether distinct from Christ's presence gener- 
ally, as it is manifested through his appointed and, 
therefore, sanctioned and sanctified means of grace.* 



■••■ The doctrine of the " Mystic Presence," as set forth by Dr. Nevin, 
is really, as this learned divine teaches, the doctrine of Calvin; but, 
notwithstanding Calvin's authority, it is clearly founded upon bare 
assumption, as it is, I conceive, entirely unsupported by evangelical 
sanction. Hence, though it should be conceded that Calvin, accord- 
ing to the distinguished author of the Mystic Presence, " was emphati- 
cally the great theologian of his age," such concession must not 
make us ignore the fact that one is our master, rabbi, or teacher, even 
Christ, our only and divinely-appointed creed-maker, and ''that all 
we are brethren," learning only of Christ, our sufficient and only 
master. (Matthew, xxiii. 8.) 

I will only add, that whatever is essential to our salvation dares 
not be obscured by mysticism, otherwise it is an enigma, not a 
revelation, and therefore incompetent to be ranked among the means 
of saving grace, or the redemptive instrumentalities of the Lord 
Jesus Christ. 



96 THE DOCTRINE OF 



s:E]CTion:Nr i"v. 

THE USE OF BLOOD, as FOOD, is forlidden in SCIUFTURE, 
and cannot, there/ore, constitute a part of the Real Presence. 



CHAPTER I. 

Its Prohibition in the Old Testament, 

What God at one time absolutely prohibits to be 
dietetically used, he cannot, under any circumstances, 
at another, .enjoin to be so used ; and, therefore, the 
use of blood, as food, being thus prohibited, blood 
cannot form a part of the Real Presence in the Lord's 
Supper, unless it can be shown that it is not impossi- 
ble for the same thing to be or not to be ; an art which, 
it seems, the Jews in Isaiah's time could boast to pos- 
sess, when they " put darkness for light, and light for 
darkness." I shall now cite authority from the Old 
Testament to prove that blood is absolutely prohibited 
as an article of food, and that the penalty annexed to 
the violation of the law on this subject is death. 

The first instance of a prohibitory enactment on this 
subject is recorded in Genesis, ix. 3-6, and is con- 
tained in these words : " Every moving thing that 
liveth, shall be meat for you ; even as the green herb 



THE LORD'S SUPPER. 97 

have I given you all things. But flesh with the 
life thereof, which is the blood thereof, shall ye not 
eat. And surely your blood of your lives will I re- 
quire ; at the hand of every beast will I require it, 
and at the hand of-man ; at the hand of every man's 
brother will I require the life of man," etc. 

However exegetes may differ in their exposition of 
this remarkable passage, it is clear that blood, used 
as food, either alone or in connection with flesh eaten 
without depletion, is peremptorily prohibited, while 
death is declared to be the inevitable penalty of a 
violation of the Divine prohibition ; and that, as inci- 
dental to a barbarous age, cannibalism was one of the 
savage forms in which the bloody meals of those days 
were wont to be indulged. 

We next turn to Leviticus, iii. 11 ; vii. 26, 2t ; xvii. 
10, 14 ; xix. 26. The words contained in these por- 
tions of Scripture reiterate and confirm the Divine 
statute against the dietetic use of blood. They are 
the following : " It shall be a perpetual statute for your 
generations throughout all your dwellings, that ye eat 
neither fat nor blood ; ye shall eat no manner of blood : 
whatsoever soul it is that eateth any manner of blood, 
even that soul shall be cut off from his people. And 
whatsoever man there is of the house of Israel, or of 
the strangers that sojourn among you, that eateth any 
manner of blood, I will even set my face against that 
soul that eateth blood, and will cut him off from among 
his people ; for the life of all flesh is the blood thereof. 
Ye shall not eat anything with the blood." 

These are plain words, plainly spoken, and will, no 
9 



98 THE DOCTRINE OF 

doubt, be plainly enough executed. Pasi^ing on to 
Deuteronomy, xii. 16, 23-25; xv. 23, we again find 
the statute against the use of blood, as food, renewed 
and in full force, and notice that while flesh diet was 
allowed to be freely indulged in by the Jews, the com- 
mand to them was: " Only ye shall not eat the blood, 
ye shall pour it upon the earth as water ; only be sure 
that thou eat not the blood, for the blood is the life, 
and thou mayest not eat the life with the flesh. Thou 
shalt not eat it; thou shalt pour ii upon the earth as 
water. Thou shalt not eat it ; that it may go well 
with thee, and with thy children after thee, when thou 
shalt do that which is right in the sight of the Lord," 
etc. 

In this place the fourth verse of the sixteenth Psalm 
also demands a brief notice. This Psalm was regarded 
by Luther, as well as by many other theologians of 
his time, as Messianic, an honor which has not grown 
obsolete, and as such I shall consider it on this occa- 
sion. The words relevant to the subject are : " Their 
drink-off*erings of blood will I not offer." These drink- 
offerings were libations made in honor of the gods, 
and consisted of blood, or of blood mixed either with 
wine or water. A part of the offering was drunk, and 
the remainder poured out at the foot of the altar, 
sacred to the object of this mode of religious worship. 
Christ positively declare."^ that he will not i)ollute his 
lips by tasting or offering such bloody libations: he 
will not drink it, this driiik-offering of blood! And 
can it be possible that he " who is the same yesterday, 
to-day, and forever," can so alter his mind or change 



THE LORD'S SUPPER. 99 

his conduct, that in the New Testament, and in an in- 
stitution emphatically sacred to himself, he can, with 
proper Divine consistency, require of his disciples to 
drink his blood? Never, no, never I 



CHAPTER II. 

Its Prohibition in the New Testament. 

In the fifteenth chapter of the Acts of the Apostles, 
we find that certain Judaizing teachers propagated the 
doctrine among the Christians of the city of Antioch, 
in Syria, that Gentile converts to Christianity must 
submit to the ancient Hebrew rite of circumcision, 
otherwise their conversion could not be regarded as 
valid, nor their pretensions to an honorable position 
among the Christians as at all pertinent or well- 
founded. The circumstance caused considerable dis- 
turbance as well as not a little bickering and animosity 
among the zealous and alike determined adherents of 
the adverse parties ; and, in order to settle the dispute 
as well as to put an end to a very unamiable state of 
feeling among the contendents, it was at length re- 
solved that the case should be carried up for decision 
to the church at Jerusalem, in which Peter — the Ce- 
phas among the Apostles — played a conspicuous part, 
and James the Less, brother of our Lord, occupied the 
honorable position of president. Accordingly, the An- 



100 THE DOCTRINE OF 

tiocbian Cbristians made choice of Paul and Barnabas, 
togetber with some otber notable persons, to go up to 
Jerusalem and kj the matter before the Apostles and 
Elders of that place for final adjudication. They ex- 
ecuted their important commission with no less fidelity 
than alacrity and success. Their arrival being duly 
announced, " the Apostles and Elders came together to 
consider the matter." A vehement dispute arose in 
this nascent ecclesiastical council, and Peter found it 
necessary to make a speech, full of energy and per- 
tinent remark, and in which he most emphatically took 
side with the liberal party, whose motto was, Progress, 
and bore down with power and emphasis against the 
unfortunate opposition, while he decidedly repudiated 
the narrow-mindedness and bigotry of an obsolete and 
effete formalism. James generously and wisely sided 
with his bold and energetic colleague, and the result 
was, that a decree was promptly issued which restored 
peace to the distracted church at Antioch, and secured 
a final triumph to the Pauline standpoint of Chris- 
tianity. This decree, with some repetition, incidental 
elucidations, and concise introductory remarks, is thus 
expressed : " Known unto God," writes St. James, the 
venerable apostle, and brother of Jesus, " are all his 
works from the beginning of the world. Wherefore, 
my sentence is, that we trouble not them, which from 
among the Gentiles are turned to God; but that we 
write unto them that they abstain from pollutions of 
idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, 
and from blood," etc. " Then," thus proceeds the 
sacred narrative, "pleased it the Apostles and Elders, 



THE LORD'S SUPPER. IQl 

with the whole Church, to send chosen men of their 
own company to Antioch, with Paul and Barnabas, 
namely, Judas, suruamed Barsabas, and Silas, chief 
men among the brethren : and they wrote letters by 
them after this manner. The Apostles, Elders, and 
Brethren send greeting- unto the brethren which are of 
the Gentiles in Antioch, and Syria, and Cilicia. For- 
asmuch as we have heard that certain which went 
out from us have troubled you with words sub- 
verting your souls, saying, Ye must be circumcised, 
and keep the law, to whom we gave no such com- 
mandment: it seemed good unto us, being assembled 
with one accord, to send chosen men unto you, with 
our beloved Barnabas and Paul ; men that have 
hazarded their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus 
Christ. We have sent, therefore, Judas and Silas, who 
shall also tell you the same things by mouth. For it 
seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us, to lay upon 
you no greater burden than these necessary things ; 
That ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from 
blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication ; 
from which if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well. 
Fare ye well." 

What is to be especially noticed here is, that the 
authors of this primordial decree in the Christian 
Church, consisting of "the Apostles, Elders, and the 
Brethren" of the Christian society at Jerusalem, did 
not act altogether in self-reliance, but sought and found 
succor through the gracious and opportune instru- 
mentality of the Holy Ghost ; for thus it is asserted 
in the decree, '' It seemed good to the Holy Ghost, 

9* 



102 THE DOCTRINE OF 

and to us." Thus Peter, occupying a position in the 
foremost rank among the apostles ; James the Less, 
brother of our Lord; the Christian elders and brethren 
of the Church at Jerusalem ; and the Holy Ghost from 
heaven, unite with one accord in the prohibition of the 
use of blood as food, either alone, or still retained in 
the defunct bodies of the strangled animals, employed 
as food.* Moreover, God, as Elohim or Jehovah, pro- 
hibits the use of blood as an article of diet in Genesis, 
Leviticus, and Deuteronomy; as Christ, in the six- 
teenth Psalm, — by his example ; and as the Holy 
Ghost, in the Acts of the Apostles ; and yet, after all 
this overwhelming mass of testimony, of heaven and 
earth combined, on the subject, we are told that Christ 
requires us to recognize and to drink his blood in the 
Lord's Supper I Alas, what strange hallucination ! 

* When the Antiochian Christians are required to abstain from 
things strangled, "We are to understand," writes Dr. Clarke, "the 
flesh of those animals •which were strangled for the purpose of keep- 
iny the blood in the body, as such animals were esteemed a great deli- 
cacy." 



THE LORD'S SUPPER. 103 



THE APOSTOLIC DECREE, ACTS, XV. 1-29, PROHIBITING 
THE USE OF BLOOD, AS AN ARTICLE OF, FOOD, IS 
STILL IN FORCE. 



It has been argued, both in ancient and more recent 
times, that the apostolic decree, prohibiting the use of 
blood as an article of food, was designed to be only of 
temporary obligation ; that it was simply intended to 
arrest certain evils prevalent in a part of the Church 
at the time of its promulgation ; and that, of course, 
it ceased to have validity as soon as the cause which 
gave rise to it ceased. The subject is one of no ordinary 
interest, and I am happy to be able to avail myself of 
a part of a most thorough and excellent disquisition, 
the object of which is its complete illustration, by Dr. 
Delaney, in a work entitled ''Kevelation examined 
with Candor."* His reasoning is so cogent, his style 
so pithy and pointed, and his polemics so calm and 
courteous, that, with the truth all on his side, he must 
necessarily obtain an easy and complete triumph. 

"But to proceed," writes the Doctor, " if this decree 
met only a temporary necessity, how long did this ne- 
cessity last?" To this Dr. Hammond answers, that 

*• See Dr. Clarke on the Acts of the Apostles. 



104 THE DOCTRINE OF 

it lasted till the Jews and Gentiles were formed into 
one communion. And St. Augustine says that it lasted 
till the time that no carnal Israelite appeared in the 
church of the Gentiles ; and again, that it lasted till 
the temple and the Jewish polity were destroyed. To 
all this, I answer, that if the two first opinions are ad- 
mitted, then the necessity of observing the apostolic 
decree continues to this day: first, because the Jews 
and Gentiles are indisputably not yet fully formed into 
one communion ; and secondly, because there was 
never any time wherein there was not some carnal 
Israelite in the church; and I think it must be notori- 
ous to many of my readers, that there are some such 
even in this part of the Christian Church, at this day: 
and so doubtless in every Christian Church over the 
face of the whole earth; and therefore both these 
opinions are wild and unsupported. 

As to the third opinion, namel\% that the necessity 
of observing this decree lasted only till the destruction 
of the Jewish temple and polity, I answer, that what- 
ever may be thought of the necessity of this decree, it 
is evident that the wisdom of it, and the advantage of 
that abstinence which was due to it, extended much 
further. Since, without this, that calumny, imputed 
to Christians, of killing infants in their assemblies, and 
drinking their blood, could never be so easily and 
so eflectually confuted ; for nothing could do this so 
thoroughly, as demonstrating that it was a funda- 
mental principle with Christians to touch no blood of 
any kind ; and what could demonstrate this so effect- 
ually as dying in attestation to the truth of it, as it is 



TEE LORD'S SUFFER. 105 

notorious, both from the apologists and the ecclesi- 
astical historians, that many Christian martyrs did? 

But it is further urged that this apostolic decree was 
only given to the Jewish proselytes, and, consequently, 
that the necessity of abstaining from blood and things 
strangled related to them only ; this, they tell us, ap- 
pears, 'Mn that the Apostle, when he preached in any 
city, did it as yet in the synagogues of the Jews, 
whither the Gentiles could not come, unless they were 
proselytes of the gate." Now this opinion, I think, 
will be sufficiently confuted by demonstrating these two 
things : first, that before the passage of this decree St. 
Paul preached Christianity to the whole body of the 
Gentiles, at Antioch ; and secondly, that this decree 
is directed to the Gentiles at large, and not to the 
Jewish proselytes. This transaction at Antioch — the 
preaching of Christianity by St. Paul to the whole 
body of the Gentiles — happened seven years before the 
decree against blood and things strangled was passed 
by the Apostles at Jerusalem. Can any man in his 
senses doubt, after this, whether the Apostles preached 
to the Gentiles before the passing of that decree ; when 
it appears, from the words now recited, that the Apos- 
tle s not only preached to the Gentiles, but preached to 
them in contradistinction to the Jews? And does any 
man know the Jews so little as to imagine that when 
the Apostles turned to the Gentiles, from them, the 
Jews would after this suffer those Apostles to preach 
to the Gentiles in their synagogues ? Besides, the 
text says, that the word of the Lord was published 
throughout all the region, Acts, xv. 23 ; consequently 



106 THE D OCT RISE OF 

the Apostles were so far from conSDiiig themselves to 
the Jewish synagogue that they were not confined 
even to the extent of that ample city, Antioch, but 
preached throughout the whole country. This opinion, 
then, that the Apostles preached only to the Jews 
and proselytes before the passing of the decree against 
blood at Jerusalem, is demonstrably false ; and if they 
preached to the Gentiles at large, to whom else can 
that decree be directed ? It is directed to the Gentile 
converts at large; and who can we imagine those 
converts were but those to whom Christianity was 
preached, that is, the Gentiles at large ?* 

But this is yet further demonstrated from St. James's 
sentence, in this fifteenth chapter of Acts, upon which 
the apostolic decree is founded. His words are these : 
'* Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not 
them, which from among the Gentiles are turned to 
God : but that we write unto them, that they abstain 
from pollutions of idols, and from foruication, and 
from things strangled, and from blood. For Moses of 
old time hath in every city them that preach him, being 
read in the synagogues every Sabbath day." Acts, 
XV. 21. What then? What if Moses had those that 
preached him in the synagogues every Sabbath ? Why 
then there was no necessity of writing upon these 
points to any of those who were admitted into the 
synagogues ; because they knew, from the writings of 



* The Jews, being already in possession of a stringent code of laws 
interdicting the dietetic use of blood, needed no new enactment on 
the subject, Act;3, xv. 21. — G. 



THE LORD'S SUPPER. lOt 

Moses, that all these things were, from the foundation 
of the world, unlawful to the whole race of Adam: 
Genesis, ix. 3-6. 

The substance of the Apostle James's sentence is, 
That we write to the Gentile converts upon these 
points. Acts, XV. 20 ; for Moses hath those of old time in 
every city, that preach him, — that is, there is no neces- 
sity of writing to any Jewish convert, or to any prose- 
lyte convert to Christianity, to abstain from those 
things ; because all that are admitted into the syna- 
gogues — as the proselytes are — know all these things 
sufficiently already ; and accordingly, upon this sentence 
of St. James, the decree was founded and directed. 
Acts, XV. 28, 29 : doubtless, from the nature of the 
thing, directed to those whom it was fitting and neces- 
sary to inform upon these points, — that is, those who 
were unacquainted with the writings of Moses ; for the 
decree, as far as it contained a direction to certain 
duties, could give no information to any others. 

An objection is also raised against this doctrine from 
the conclusion of the decree. Ye do well ; insinuating 
that though they should do well to observe it, yet they 
did no ill in not observing it. I answer, that doing 
well, in the style of Scripture, as well as common 
speech, is acting agreeably to our duty ; and doing 
well in necessary things must certainly be acting agree- 
ably to necessary duty ; and certainly the same duty 
cannot be at the . same time necessary and indiffer- 
ent. The objection is farther added, that if the points 
contained in this decree are not parts of the Mosaic 
law, the decree has no relation to the question in debate ; 



108 THE DOCTRINE OF 

for the debate was, whether the Gentile converts to 
Cliristiauity should be obliged to observe the law of 
Moses ? My reply is, that the decree hath the clearest 
relation to the question ; inasmuch as it is a decision 
that the Gentile converts were not obliged to observe 
the law of Moses. It hath, at the same time, a plain 
relation to the point in question; for what could be 
more proper than to take occasion to let the Gentiles 
know that they were obliged to the observance of such 
duties as were obligatory antecedently to the law of 
Moses, Genesis, ix. 3-G, though they were exempted 
from that law ? 

Beside this, it is urged that the decree could only 
oblige those to whom it was directed, — that is, the Gen- 
tiles of Antioch, and Syria, and Cilicia. As if the 
decree, and the reason of it, did not equally extend to 
all Gentile converts throughout the whole world. And 
as if this doctrine was only taught and received in 
those particular regions ; when it is evident, beyond a 
possibility of being denied or doubted, that all Chris- 
tians, in every region of the earth, were taught, and 
actually embraced, the same doctrine, at least, for the 
lirst three hundred years after Christ. 

Finally, it is objected that this dispute could not 
have happened otherwise, except between Gentile and 
Judaizing converts ; and consequently, the decision of 
it must have respect to the conduct, which it was then 
necessary the Gentiles should hold, with regard to the 
Jews, who could not converse with them upon the basis 
of a friendly comtnuiiiealion ; could not sit at meat, 
etc., unh'Sri the (Jentiles aljstained from blood, etc. ; 



TEE LORD'S SUPPER. 109 

consequently that this necessity has now ceased. My 
answer to this, admitting the premises, is, I must own 
I cannot see how this conclusion follows from them, as 
long as there are Jews and Mohammedans in the world 
to be converted to the Christian religion.* 

* From Bruce's Travels, according to Burder's " Oriental Cus- 
toms," it appears that when he visited Abyssinia, the natives prac- 
ticed eating blood, not only of slaughtered animals, but of such as 
were still alive, exsecting or cutting out slices of meat from the 
rump of a cow, " thicker and longer than our ordinary beef-steaks." 

Antes, in his " Observations on the Manners and Customs of the 
Egyptians," thus confirms the foregoing statement : " I have heard 
not only Bruce's servant, but many eye-witnesses, often speak of the 
Abyssinians eating raw flesh." 

How prone the Israelites were to the crime of eating blood, not- 
withstanding the severe penalties, which were denounced against the 
practice, is shown by reference to 1 Samuel, xiv. 32,33. 



10 



no THE DOCTRINE OF 



SECTIOnsT ATI. 

THE DISCOURSE OF THE SAVIOUR, IN JOHN, VI. 32- 
63, IMPARTIALLY EXAMINED, AND ILLUSTRATED 
WITH DIRECT REFERENCE TO THE DOCTRINE OF 
THE REAL PRESENCE IN THE LORD'S SUPPER. 



The memorable incident which, it seems, gave rise 
to the discourse of our Lord, recorded in John, vi. 32- 
G3, may be recognized in the thirtieth and thirty-first 
verses of that important chapter. The Jews asked 
the Divine teacher to give them a sign calculated to 
accredit the authenticity of his mission, as Moses did to 
their ancestors, when he gave them "bread — manna — 
from heaven." Our Lord denied that that manna was 
heaven-bread, in the higher and proper sense of the 
term, and assured his sign-seeking and hyper-skeptic 
countrymen that he alone had the real, life-giving and 
saving heaven-bread, the spiritual manna, descending 
from the empyrean abode of bliss, far transcending, in 
preciousness and enduring excellence, all Arabia's 
manna, though eminently a God-given gift. 

The Capernaitic discourse, so called from the fact 
that it was delivered at Capernaum, a principal city of 
Galilee, is remarkable for its eminently figurative lan- 
guage, owing to which, it has often proved the puzzle 



THE LORD'S SUPPER. HI 

and the discomfiture of the exegete. Yet the difficulty, 
properly to interpret it, is doubtless more to be ascribed 
to a want of just appreciation of the genius of Orien- 
tal language, which is emphatically prolific and, oc- 
casionally, even exuberant, in the use of tropes, as 
has been already shown, and as is here at once, so 
forcibly and in so remarkable a degree, exemplified 
in the rhetoric composition before us. But, it may 
be said, if the Orientals are so familiar with such 
extraordinary phraseology as that which the Saviour 
used in his Capernaitic discourse, how is it that, ac- 
cording to the sacred writer, neither his Jewish nor 
his Christian hearers understood the true meaning and 
drift of his words, though they were both natives of 
the East; and besides, his intimate disciples — espe- 
cially the Apostles — had already had considerable 
opportunity to familiarize themselves with his some- 
what frequent and excessive indulgence in the employ- 
ment of tropes, which might at first, in some measure, 
bewilder or startle an Occidental audience ? If, in- 
stead of an Apostle, a secular historian should record 
the fact that the Jews, instead of instantly compre- 
hending the aim and force of the flowery expressions 
of our Lord, used on this occasion, had, on the con- 
trary, manifested profound perplexity, exclaiming, 
" How can this man give us his flesh to eat ?" — or, 
that many of the Saviour's disciples, of whom it seems 
better things might have been expected, instead of 
readily affiliating in sentiment with the Oriental modus 
loquendi of their Divine and beloved rabbi, appear to 
have been fully as obtuse, in respect to an intelligent 



112 THE DOCTRINE OF 

and profitable appreciation of the important truths that 
were proclaimed to them, as the carnal and indocile 
Jews, and to have betrayed an ignorance and inapti- 
tude of learning not at all inferior to their unregener- 
ate countrymen, exclaiming, " This is a hard saying ; 
who can hear it ?" — I should feel hesitancy to credit 
the statement, so implausible does it seem, at first 
blush, to a person living in the light of the nineteenth 
century, yet who humbly presumes to include himself 
among an audience to whom the Capernaitic discourse 
is ever addressed, and to whom it must always be 
a topic of the highest interest as well as priceless 
value. 

The remarkable modes of expression in this striking 
discourse, which merit a brief yet careful attention in 
this connection, are, that Christ is " the bread of God" ; 
that he is " the bread of life" ; that " he that cometh 
to him shall never hunger, and he that believeth in 
him shall never thirst." Moreover, that he is "the 
living bread" ; that " whoever eats this bread — the 
spiritual manna — shall live forever" ; that the bread 
which he gives his followers is his flesh, which he 
gives " for the life of the world" ; that unless we "eat 
his flesh and drink his blood" — metonymic expressions, 
for subsisting psychologically on the fruits of his 
redemption — " we have no life in us," bufthat, on the 
contrary, "eternal life " will be our reward ; that his 
flesh and blood are incat and drink indeed; that, 
finally, "if we eat his flesh and drink his blood, we 
dwell in him and he in us": are psychologically one in 
sentiment and in aspiration. 



THE LORD'S SUPPER. 113 

That these words are figurative and have a spiritual 
import, though they do not imply supernatural and 
incomprehensible mysteries, as Luther and others 
teach, must, I think, be evident to most persons of re- 
flecting and intelligent minds. Does not our Saviour 
declare in the plainest and most emphatic language, 
that the bread which he gives us is his flesh, — 
that is, the fruit of the sacrifice of himself for the life 
of the world ? In the death of the cross, he gave his 
flesh for us, and in thus giving it, — that is, in thus giv- 
ing himself, — his followers cannot, of course, eat and 
drink his flesh and blood literally, but they can and 
shall eat and drink them spiritually, through means of 
faith and holy living, — that is, appropriate mentally and 
morally, or, in other words, psychologically, the bless- 
ings which he procured for us, by becoming a sin- 
offering in our behalf on Golgotha. I may add, that 
the sense of these expressions is strikingly analogous 
to that of the words in the Lord's Supper, This is my 
body, which is given for you ; this is my blood, which 
is shed for you, etc., the meaning of which has been 
suf&ciently demonstrated to be figurative. The words 
in this discourse which are regarded by literal inter- 
preters as especially favoring the idea of oral mandu- 
cation — receiving and masticating in the mouth the 
carnal body df Christ, — a mode of eating the Saviour's 
body which, it is boldly asserted, is incomprehensible 
and supernatural — are the following : "As the living 
Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father ; so he 
that eateth me, even he shall live by me." The plain, 
unsophisticated sense of which is, that as Christ, as 
10* 



114 TEE DOCTRINE OF 

Saviour, lived through means of the Father's grace, so 
we should live through his grace, which, by the use 
of a trope, he calls eating him. In other words, we 
shall live by him — by his grace or redeeming gifts, 
procured for us in his death — after the manner in which 
he lived by the Father, in the possession of "the 
Spirit without measure." We can no more literally 
eat Christ than Christ could literally eat the Father ; 
for the word so, in the text, implies parity in the mode 
of living by the Father and by the Son, and therefore, 
as this mode of living is only practicable spiritually in 
the one case, it must needs be only practicable spir- 
itually in the other. This view of the subject, I am 
satisfied, will finally triumph over all opposition, and 
become the universal sentiment of the Church. 

Again, Christ says, if we eat his flesh and drink his 
blood " we shall dwell in him and he in us." The ad- 
vocates of a Real Presence may well pause and reflect, 
in the commanding presence of these words ; for surely 
not an incomprehensible supernatural eating and drink- 
ing of a corporeal hypostasis will here satisfy sound 
exegesis, but a spiritual apprehension only of the text 
can do it justice. I will only observe, that we recip- 
rocally dwell in Christ and Christ in us, if "the same 
mind is in us that was in him" : then we are his spir- 
itual offspring, in the same sense in which Paul calls 
Timothy "my own son in the faith.'^ Moreover, 
Christ assures his disciples, that " they should see him 
ascend up where he was before." Of course, after as- 
cension, his body would be no longer present or access- 
ible, and an oral manducalion of it would be thence- 



THE LORD'S SUPPER. 115 

forth plainly impossible. Maybe, after that astounding 
event, their eyes were somewhat opened ! Finally, the 
Saviour clearly settles this question himself, in a man- 
ner that admits of neither doubt nor gainsaying, in 
these emphatic and decisive words: ''It is the spirit 
that quickeneth ; the flesh profiteth nothing : the words 
that I speak unto you," — in this Capernaitic discourse, 
— "they are spirit, and they are life."* 

* It may not be either without interest or profit to hear Zwinglius' 
opinion on the sixth chapter of the Gospel according to John, illus- 
trating, at the same time, the nature and design of the Lord's Supper. 
" Among his confidential correspondents," writes Professor Mayer, in 
his " History of the German Reformed Church," " was Mattheus Alber, 
pastor of a church in Reutlingen. To this man he imparted his opinion 
on the words of the institution in the Lord's Supper, Take, eat ; this is 
my body, etc., and the argument, at length, by which he maintained it. 
It was based chiefly upon the discourse of Christ, in the sixth chap- 
ter of John, where the Lord speaks of eating his flesh and drinking 
his blood. He granted that Christ had no reference in that place to 
the eucharistic supper, but observed that he there spoke of an eating 
of his flesh and a drinking of his blood, by which nothing of a material 
nature was intended. The Lord calls himself the bread of life, and 
declares that whoever eats of this bread shall never die; and he 
presently explains in what sense it is that he calls himself a living 
food, and in what sense this living food may be eaten : ' The bread 
which I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the 
world;' and, 'Whosoever believeth in me hath eternal life.' His 
flesh is, therefore, become the food of the soul so far as it is delivered 
to death for the world's salvation ; and to eat his flesh, and to drink 
his bloud, is to believe in him; to believe that he was ofi"ered to God 
as an expiatory sacrifice for our sins, in his flesh, — that is, in his 
human nature. Hence when the. Jews took offence at his words, be- 
cause he insisted on the necessity of eating his flesh, and drinking 
his blood, if they would have life, he remarked, in explanation of his 
meaning, ' It is the spirit that quickeneth : the flesh profiteth no- 
thing.' 'What/ says Zwinglius here, 'can be more forcible than 



116 THE DOCTRINE OF 

In John, iv. 10, 14, 23, 24, we find a close analogy, 
both in expression and doctrine, to the language and 
tenets set forth in the Capernaitic discourse. Had the 
Samaritan woman asked it of Christ, he says, "He 
would have given her living water" ; adding, that "who- 
ever drank of the water that he would give him should 
never thirst," etc. What else can these propositions 
denote but Christ-indoctrination and the abundant so- 
terial blessings and graces, incident to the vicarious 
death of Christ? The phrase, "living water," cannot, 
of course, be understood literally, as water is not alive, 
being a fluid destitute of organic structure, and it must, 
therefore, imply the means of salvation, with which 
the Redeemer so richly and beneficently provides his 
followers. In short, the expressive epithets which the 
Saviour applies to the proffered water of salvalioji, at 
the patriarchal well, must be interpreted spiritually, 
and in a manner readily comprehensible by the human 
mind ; for the Christian religion, in its God-given pu- 
rity, is eminently a spiritual mode of worship, and as 
such only approved and blessed by God : it is the 
highest and best form of worship to which, in the 
providence of God, the human race has yet attained; 
it is, in fact, the sublime, soul-ennobling worship of 
God, "in s})irit and in truth," observed and fully re- 
alized only by "the true worshipers"; a worship em- 

tbcse words to overthrow all the figments of an essential bodily flesh 
of Christ in the Sacrament ? If the eating of his flesh in this sense 
would be useless, could Christ have designed to give us his flesh to 
eat iu the Sacrauieut? Would he give what he declares to be use- 
less?' " 



THE LORD'S SUPPER. lit 

phatically sought and inculcated by God, for " God 
is a spirit, and they that worship him must worship 
him in spirit and in truth" : not in an insensate routine 
of dead formalism, or hypocritical disguise and delu- 
sive parade. The water which our Lord gives the 
believer has never been seen or tasted as water, in the 
common acceptation of the term ; but as a spiritual 
blessing, a heavenly gift, conferring everlasting life, it 
has and ever is. 

To the foregoing investigation, I add the interesting 
passage of Scripture found in Proverbs, ix. 1-5. Here 
Wisdom is personified, and she has a " house" with 
" seven pillars"; has "killed her beasts"; "mingled" — 
spiced " her wine" : to heighten its color and improve its 
flavor; and "furnished her table." The feast being thus 
prepared, Wisdom's messengers are sent forth to invite 
the guests ; ay, " she hath sent forth her maidens : she 
crieth upon the highest places," in the more prominent 
localities, " of the city, Whoso is simple," — lacks under- 
standing and the principles of a religious and virtuous 
life, — " let him turn in hither ; come, eat of my bread, 
and drink of the wine which I have mingled." Here the 
sacred writer, famous in gnomic lore, represents the 
means through which we attain to Divine knowledge 
and a holy life as wine, bread, and the flesh of beasts, 
— as a soul-feast ; and the tropical language which he 
employs is of the same bold and striking kind as that 
which we have met in different parts of the Gospel 
according to John, and subjected to a concise though 
somewhat elaborate scrutiny. There is wine, here 
blood ; there the flesh of slaughtered beasts, here the 



118 THE DOCTRINE OF 

flesh of the Son of man ; there bread, here water and 
bread. Such lively and picturesque phraseology is ex- 
tremely beautiful. How grand, yet how simple ! how 
flowery and animated, yet how earnest and solemn, are 
the style and structure of such sublime and instructive 
modes of teaching I 

It was especially the language in the Capernaitic 
discourse that attracted the notice and claimed the at- 
tention of the Reformers, in reference to the words in 
the Lord's Supper supposed to be indicative of a Real 
Presence. According to the Symbolical Books (see 
Ludwig's fifth edition of the Book of Concord, page 
493 and page 597),* the body and blood of our Lord, in 
the Lord's Supper, are not partaken of in a crass, Ca- 
pernaitic, but in a supernatural and celestial manner, 
— not in the least intelligible to anybody; yet, notwith- 
standing this, in their capacity of the real body and 
blood of Christ, given and shed for us, for the remis- 
sion of sins. What astounding doctrine ! The identi- 
cal body and blood of Christ, as they existed at the 
crucifixion, are orally eaten and drunk, and thus die- 
tetically consumed like common aliment, etc.; and yet 
Luther and the Concordists reject a Capertiaitic eat- 
ing and drinking of Christ's flesh and blood, believed 
by the Jews and many of the Christian disciples, who 
composed the audience of our Lord's Capernaitic dis- 
course, to be absolutely inculcated by the Saviour. 



* This is the cditiun of the Look of Concord, always referred to, 
iu this Work, unless otherwise stated. 



TEE LORD'S SUPPER. - 119 

What strange contradiction I Nay, indeed, I may say, 
what crude and groveling notions I 

But let us hear Luther, as he writes on this subject, 
in the Larger Catechism : " In consequence of the 
declaration of our Lord, This — the bread — is my body ; 
this — the wine — is my blood, etc., you may rest con- 
tent, and bid defiance to a hundred thousand devils, 
together with all the accompanying crew of fanatics, 
when they interpose their objection and say, 'How 
can bread and wine be the body and blood of Christ?' 
etc. In spite of such cavil and opposition, — which are 
not of the slightest weight, compared with Divine 
wisdom, — Christ's assurance is true and must endure ; 
Take, eat : this is my body ; drink ye all of this : this 
cup is the new testament in — of in the original — my 
blood," etc. This view is reiterated and confirmed in 
the Form of Concord, page 588. 

In conclusion, it may be stated that the Keformer 
not only lays great stress upon the words. This is my 
body, etc., in the Lord's Supper, but also repeatedly 
appeals, to show the propriety for so doing, to St. Au- 
gustine's axiom, '' Accedat verbum ad elementum, et fit 
sacramentum," — that is, the words. This is my body, 
added to the sacramental bread and wine, constitute 
a sacrament. Hence, that a sacrament may be thus 
constituted, it seems the words of Christ must be 
taken literally, notwithstanding the body and blood of 
our Lord are said not to be manducated or eaten cor- 
poreally, but spiritually, and in a supernatural and 
incomprehensible manner, though they are orally 
brought, like ordinary food, under the proper influence 



120 THE DOCTRINE OF 

of the digestive organs. All this, it seems, happens 
thus, or is brought about in this way, for the sake of 
sacramental effect I Alas, it is difficult to go forth from 
the bosom of a corrupt Church without bearing away 
with us some spot or wrinkle! Romanism, once firmly 
fixed in the soul, though renounced and abhorred, no 
Christian chemistry can ever quite neutralize or ob- 
literate ! 



THE LORD'S SUPPER. 121 



THE DOCTRINE OF THE REAL PRESENCE, IN THE 
LORD'S SUPPER, MUST BE, FOREVER, RETAINED; 
FOR THE BOOK OF CONCORD, OF WHICH IT FORMS 
A PART, IS REQUIRED TO BE SUBSCRIBED. 



CHAPTER I. 

Students and Ministers, at Present received into the German Evan- 
gelical Lutheran Ministerium of Pennsylvania and Adjacent 
States, are obliged to subscribe all the Symbolical Books or Con- 
fessions of Faith. 

The time is not very remote when the creed of this 
Ministerium was rather undefined and vacillating than 
clearly expressed or accurately understood; and it 
would have been impossible to recognize its tendency 
or utterance as, in any degree, implying general unan- 
imity. Its faith in "the commandments of men," as 
doctrines of the Church, had suffered signal decay, 
while the affectionate fellowship, love, and good-will 
subsisting among its members, shone out with re- 
splendent lustre. Doubtless opinions still differ, but 
differences of opinions are seldom elicited, or forced to 
the surface, while usually sufficient concord prevails 
to insure harmony in counsel and unity of action. 

11 



122 THE DOCTRINE OF 

Circumstances, in regard to this subject, have materi- 
ally altered, and this Ministerium, once lenient and 
forbearing almost to excess, exercises, at present, con- 
siderable rigor in its administration, manifesting, in 
the opinion of some, a spirit not quite compatible with 
liberty of conscience, or the character of our free in- 
stitutions. Formerly indifferentism, to a considerable 
extent, distinguished its dogmatic views, and few, per- 
haps, of its members thought either of the necessity 
or the expediency of subscription to a creed ; but stu- 
dents who are now received into this Ministerium, 
after a course of preparatory training, are required, 
as soon as the solemn act of their ordination is com- 
pleted, to subscribe unto its ample creed or confession 
of faith. 

The same creed-subscription is demanded of those 
ministers who have heretofore labored outside of the 
pale of this Ministerium, and w^ho now apply for ad- 
mission to membership. In neither case, however, 
as far as is known to the writer, is this fact formally 
announced in the constitution of this Ministerium, but 
the truth is, notwithstanding, as it is here stated. 
" When Evangelical Lutheran ministers," says the 
constitution of this Ministerium, " who have been 
ordained by any other Ministerium in the United 
States, or in any foreign country, or lawfully ordained 
ministers of another Christian denomination, apply 
for reception into this Ministerium, they shall produce 
satisfactory evidence that they have maintained an 
unblemished character in their previous ecclesiastical 
relation, and be subjected to a colloquium with the 



THE LORD'S SUPPER. 123 

Examining Committee, in order to establish their 
agreement with the Confession and usage of this Min- 
ister ium.^^ 

At their installation, the Professors in the Philadel- 
phia Seminary are required to make the following 
enunciation of their faith, according to Article 2, Sec- 
tion 3, of the Constitution of the Seminary : '' I believe 
that the unaltered Augsburg Confession is, in all its 
parts, in harmony with the Rule of Faith, and is a 
correct exhibition of doctrine. And I believe that the 
Apology, the Catechisms of Luther, the Schmalkald 
Articles, and the Formula of Concord, are a faithful 
development and defence of the Word of Grod, and of 
the Augsburg Confession. And all my teachings shall 
be in conformity with His word and the above con- 
fessions." 

What is especially noticeable here is, that the con- 
fessions of faith enumerated in this article are put 
upon a parity with the word of God ; they conform 
now, and the idea held out is, of course, that they 
always will conform, which is erroneous, indeed he- 
retical ; for an appeal from the human creed to the 
Scriptures should always be deemed in order, and will 
never be refused, except where ecclesiastical despotism 
prevails. 

"All questions concerning the faith of the Church 
and the administration of the Sacraments," we are 
informed in the second chapter of this constitution, 
" shall be decided in accordance with this Rule, and 
with these Confessions." This Rule and these Con- 



124 THE DOCTRISE OF 

fessions are thus described:* "This Synod confesses 
that the Canonical Books of the Old and Xew Testa- 
ments are the Word of God, given bv inspiration of 
the Holy Ghost, and are the clear, only, and sufficient 
Rule of Faith; that three General Creeds, the Apos- 
tles', the Xicene, and the Athanasian, exhibit the faith 
of the Church universal, in accordance with this 
Eule; — that the ?^??a?^ere(Z Augsburg Confession is,f 
in all its parts, in harmony with the Rule of Faith, 
and is a correct exhibition of doctrine ; — and that the 
Apology, the two Catechisms of Luther, the Schmal- 
• kald Articles, and the Formula of Concord, are a faithful 
development and defence of the doctrines of the Word 
of God, and of the Augsburg Confession."! 

* Though I have already pointed out the nature and extent of tho 
creed of this Ministerium as the true and literal expression of Sym- 
bolical Lutheranism, yet I deem it not improper or superfluous to lay 
it once more before the reader in the INIinisterium's own language. 

t " In the year fifteen hundred and forty," writes Schott, in his 
" Unaltered Augsburg Confession,"' " Melanchthon published a Latin 
edition of the Augsburg Confession, in which he left out of the 10th 
Article, treating of the Sacrament, the words : aduini et distri- 
hnnntnr, and in their stead, added : exhibeantur ; so that the wholo 
passage read as follows: De cccna Domini docent, quod cum ^^a/je c* 
vino vere exhibeantur corpus et sanguis Christi vescentibus in ccena 
Domini ; but the words, et iiuprobant srcus doccntes, therefore the 
opposite doctrine is rejected — which were directed against Zwingli's 
and Calvin's followers, — he entirely left out." 

The meaning of this is, that, instead that the body and blood of 
Christ are really present in, trith, and under the bread and wine in the 
Lord's Supper, the broad and wine onit/ exhibit or represent the 
body and blood of Christ. 

X Here we are told that the inspired word of God " is the clear 
and suflk-icut rule of faith." If this is so, why is the Christian 



THE LORD'S SUPPER, 125 



CHAPTER 11. 

By Subscription to an Unalterable Creed Progress in Religious 
Knowledge is stayed, and Violence done to Conscience. 

Religious associations cannot exist, or its members 
act in concert, unless they have views and feelings, 
to a certain extent, in common. "Can," writes the 
Prophet Amos, *' two walk together unless they are 
agreed ?" But, to a mutual agreement to carry out the 
principles of the gospel and accomplish all the good 
that is in our power, according to the measure of Divine 
grace vouchsafed to us, it is neither necessary nor 
required that we should unconditionally obligate our- 
selves to a perpetual observance of a Confession of 
Faith. The human mind is God-destined to progress- 
ive development; and to fetter and inthrall it by ab- 
solute submission to human opinion, however worthy 
of attention such opinion may be deemed to be, is a 



Church pestered and rent with so many conflicting human creeds? 
If the Scriptures are the only rule, it is clear there can be no other, 
and why, then, offer another ? Nay, if the Scriptures are the clear, 
only, and sufficient rule of faith, we have no need of the interposi- 
tion of the authoritative ipse dixit of a St. Augustine, a Thomas 
Aquinas, a Luther, or a, Calvin. Yet I consider it both a pleasure 
and a duty to listen to the teachings of learned and pious men of 
past ages, and to entertain with proper respect their opinions as 
evidences of private. Christian convictions, but not as a reyula 
fidei or rule of faith ! 

11* 



126 THE DOCTRINE OF 

criminal encroachment upon the rights of conscience, 
engraven in the soul by the hand of God himself, 
Man's action must be free, otherwise it lacks the at- 
tributes of humanity, and is destitute of responsibility. 
What Milton writes of the freedom of the spirits in 
heaven, to stand or fall, is literally applicable to man- 
kind, and properly deserves a notice in this place. In 
his "Paradise Lost," the stern poet thus sings: 

" Not free, what proof could they have given sincere 
Of true allegiance, constant faith or love. 
"Where only what they needs must do appear'd ; 
Not what they would ? "What praise could they receive ? 
"What pleasure I from such obedience paid, 
"When will and reason (reason also is choice) 
Useless and vain, of freedom both despoil'd. 
Made passive both, had served necessity, 
Not me ?" etc. 

If human creeds are irrevocably to bind the soul, 
the Bible ceases to have formative power in our reli- 
gious investigations, and it can no longer be counted 
among the agencies of our salvation. In such case it be- 
comes, first, superfluous, and secondly, obsolete, when 
the pope — Protestant or Roman Catholic, it matters 
little — will say to the friend and the pupil of the Bible 
as Pio Nono did to his youthful chaplain, Gavazzi, — 
now Father Gavazzi, the controlling spirit of the Free- 
Church movement in Italy, — when the latter, in a dis- 
course in the Church of St. John Lateran, on the 
day this pope was to assume the tiara or triple 
crown, spoke in favor of circulating the Holy Scrip- 
tures. Summoned into his presence, the i)ope, among 
other rcpriiiiaiuls, thus adduessed tlie incipient reformer : 



THE LORD'S SUPPER. 12t 

" You spoke* of the circulation of the Holy Scriptures ; 
are you mad ? The Bible is a theological work, to be 
locked only in the libraries of ordaiued priests. Would 
you revolutionize the world, young sir?" 

Thus, where creedism prevails, as is now too much 
the case, even among Protestant denominations, who 
appear to prefer an inane ritualism to the untinseled 
worship taught in the gospel, instead of a direct, quick- 
ening Bible influence, the Bible must, sooner or later, 
meet a fate similar to that which has befallen it in 
papal countries, where — in rare cases only — a special 
license from the bishop can authorize the reading of 
it, and where the people have become the easy prey of 
designing priests. There is no other alternative ; we 
are free only in as far as "the Son of God makes us 
free," John, viii. 36 ; he failing us, through Jesuitic 
craft or idolatrous devotion to human authority, we 
are inevitably doomed to spiritual degradation and 
slavery : when the Ark of God fell into the unclean 
hands of the Philistines, Israel's polar star was 
quenched in night ! Let us, then, hold fast, with Her- 
culean grasp, what has been intrusted to our care, as 
God's best gift to man, — the Bible, " that no man may 
take our crown," Bevelation, iii. 11. 

If unconditional subscription to creeds is to control 
the convictions and the duties of the theologian, he 
has no need to pass through a long and laborious 
course of study to qualify himself for the proper dis- 
charge of the functions of his office. All he needs, to 

* See Lutheran Observer, June 21, 1872. 



128 THE DOCTRIXE OF 

be an orthodox and efficient minister, is implicitly to 
yield assent to the confession of faith prescribed by 
his religious association, and in his pulpit and cate- 
chetical exercises servilely impart and disseminate its 
peculiar doctrines and institutions. If any of these are 
unscriptural, they are unscrupulously handed down to 
distant ages, as chaff among the wheat, and, for errors 
in faith or practice, there is no remedy. The Real 
Presence, for example, must not be doubted ; man's 
utter moral impotence not suspected : and his uncon- 
ditional predestination not questioned. Under soch 
appalling circumstances, it is needless to exhort the 
minister to study to show himself " approved onto 
God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly 
dividing the word of trufh,'^ 2 Timothy, ii. 15. The 
Bible, being kept in the background, or, in a doctrinal 
point of view, altogether ignored, human opinion 
henceforth supplants the oracles of God, and the 
inquiry is virtually no longer, What do the Scriptures 
teach, but what teach such men as Luther, or Calvin, 
or Wesley, or Menno, or Swedenborg? etc. Their 
opinions have for centuries been oracular in a large 
portion of Christendom, and, Ijeing the received and 
honored Shibboleths of the different sects, who are 
indebted to them for their denominational existence, 
they will be, as unalterable rules of faith, — instead of 
advancing with the progress of biblical light, — inviola- 
bly transmitted to future ages : the wheel of time can 
move only iu the old rut, which is deemed safe, in 
proportion as it is deep and muddy ! 

The attempt to bind the believer, for all time to 



THE LORD'S SUPPER. 129 

come, to the opinions of men of former ages, is un- 
scriptural, unprotestant, and unreasonable. Luther, 
though, unhappily, not always consistent in his views, 
more than once expressed the generous sentiment that, 
rather than his writings should draw away the atten- 
tion of mankind from the Bible, he wished that they 
might all be committed to the flames. Then, heed- 
ing such wise teaching, let us beware that subscription 
to creeds does not petrify our church-life, or swathe 
the living in the mouldy bands of the niched mummy. 
Unconditional creed-subscription often exercises a 
very pernicious influence upon the mind and fortune of 
the subscriber. If he continues true to his traditional 
creed, he is, of course, past improvement, and, like 
the barren fig-tree, he may justly be supposed to 
'' cumber the ground "; if, on the contrary, he extends 
his researches beyond it, and finds the word of God 
and his confessions of faith at variance, he will either 
suppress his discoveries, and thus dissemble, in order 
to continue in the undisturbed enjoyment of his present 
relations, or he will, like a true man, boldly avow his 
altered sentiments, and, in so doing, be sure to be 
branded as a heretic. The consequence is, a blight is 
henceforth shed upon his career. Alas that such 
is the case, but an " offence " like this, in the language 
of Shakspeare, " is rank ; it smells to heaven !"* 

* In a Sermon on Steadfastness in Doctrine and Duty, " Delivered at 
the Opening of the One Hundred and Twenty-fourth Annual Conven- 
tion of the German Evangelical Lutheran Ministerium of Pennsyl- 
vania and Adjacent States, Easton, Trinity Sunday, June 4, 1871, by 
Charles F. Schaeffer, D.D., Professor of Theology in the Theological 



130 THE DOCTRINE OF 

Seminary of the Evangelical Lutheran Church, at Philadelphia," the 
inviolable perpetuity of the Symbolical Books of the Lutheran 
Church is thus set forth and inculcated. 

On page 6, the Professor says of Luther and his associates in the 
Reformation, that when God charged them with this commission, 
" they never could have accomplished the great work assigned to 
them unless he had endued them with a living and irresistible 
faith." From this announcement, the conclusion seems necessarily 
to follow, that what the Reformers taught, thus "endued," most be 
as much God's word as the Bible itself. For a faith that is, at the 
the same time, God-given, living, and irresistible, must rank among 
the highest species of faith, and cannot, therefore, admit anything 
superior to it. Of course, the creed of the Reformers must have 
binding force equal to that of the Bible itself. 

Again, on page 7, the Professor writes : *' We are willing to make 
every reasonable concession to others for the sake of peace, and for 
the purpose of conciliating them, but let none ask us to deny or sup- 
press any of the holy doctrines of our Church," etc. From this 
statement, I infer that there is little hope that the doctrine of the 
Real Presence will be erased from the Articles of Faith of old Lu- 
theranism without a severe struggle. 

Finally, agreeably to what the Professor asserts, pages 14 and 15, 
the doctrines of the Holy Scriptures and of the Symbolical Books are 
of equal authority, and hence, "Our creed must be maintained in its 
absolute independence, without any increase or diminution suggested 
by the views of men." No advancement in religious knowledge can 
be made, since God "hath in these last days spoken unto us by his 
Son," Hebrews, i. 2. Comment here is useless; and I will only add 
that, according to Professor SchaefiFer, the Confession of Faith, 
sacred to Old Lutheranism, appears to be as fixed and immutable as 
the immortal laws of the ancient Medes and Persians, or like the 
haughty reply of Pilate to the chief prie«t« of the Jeict, " What I 
have written, I have written," Juhn xix. 22. 

In the seventeenth paragraph of the twentieth chapter of the 
fourth book of bis " Essay Concerning the Human Understanding," 
Locke thus writes on servile or implicit submission to received opin- 
ion : " The last wrong measure of probability I shall take notice of, 
and which keeps in ignorance or error more people than all the 
other together, is that which I mentioned in the foregoing chapter ; 



THE LOED'S SUFFER. 131 

* 
I mean the giving up our assent to the common received opinions, 
either of our friends or party, neighborhood or country. How many 
men have no other ground for their tenets than the supposed hon- 
esty, or learning, or number, of those of the same profession ! As 
if honest or bookish men could not err, or truth vrere to be estab- 
lished by the vote of the multitude ! — yet this, with most men, serves 
the turn. The tenet has had the attestation of reverent antiquity, 
it comes to me with the passport of former ages, and therefore I am 
secure in the reception I give it : other men have been, and are of 
the same opinion, and therefore it is reasonable for me to embrace 
it. A man may more justifiably throw up cross and pile for his 
opinions, than take them up by such measures. All men are liable 
to error, and most men are in many points, by passion or interest, 
under temptation to it. If we could but see the secret motives that 
influence the men of name and learning in the world, and the lead- 
ers of parties, we should not always find that it was the embracing 
of truth for its own sake that made them espouse the doctrines they 
owned and maintained. This at least is certain, there is not an 
opinion so absurd which a man may not receive upon this ground. 
There is no error to be named which has not had its professors; and 
a man shall never want crooked paths to walk in, if he thinks that 
he is in the right way whenever he has the footsteps of others to 
follow." 



132 THE DOCTRISE OF 



THE BIBLE. XOT MAX OB HUM AX DICTA TIOX, IS THE 
OXLT AUTHOBITY IX FAITH A XD CHRISTIAX LIFE: 
A PRIXCIPLE OF IXTERPRETATIOX WHICH, IX THE 
PRESEXT LIGHT OF EXEGESIS, MUST PROVE FATAL 
TO THE DOGMA OF THE REAL PRESEXCE. 



'When Christ appeared in Palestine, clothed in the 
exalted character of Saviour of the world, he pro- 
claimed the glad tidings of the gospel, with rare ex- 
ceptions, to the illiterate Jews, — ''the lost sheep of 
the House of Israel," — whose adaptedness for hear- 
ing the Divine word consisted simplv in a sincere 
desire to be instructed in the principles of the Chris- 
tian religion, and in the possession and exercise of 
plain common sense. It happened occasionally that 
the Saviour, as I have already stated in another place, 
used phrases or introduced subjects which were not 
immediately intelligible by his audience, and then, 
finding that he was not understood, or being asked 
for an explanation of the discourse or saying with 
which he had entertained them, he readily complied 
with their wishes ; and thus his instructions seem, in 
most cases at least, to have been properly appreci- 
ated, and to have produced a salutary, if not always 



THE LORD'S SUPPER. 133 

a saving, influence upon the hearts of his unsophisti- 
cated hearers. Only those who came to him, not to 
learn, but to scoff and cavil, went away dissatisfied or 
unameliorated. Otherwise he taught his hearers with 
so much plainness of manner and simplicity of style, 
that the most ignorant or stupid must needs have un- 
derstood him. Commentaries and notes were as little 
known as they were needed in those pristine days of 
Christ-teaching, and the Divine mission of the Son of 
God could be well enough understood without such 
helps as the Heidelberg Catechism, the Articles of the 
Synod of Dort, or the Form of Concord. What, man, 
erring, sinful man, is to be saved, and Christ, who, 
animated by sentiments of mercy towards him, comes 
expressly from heaven to save him, fails to make him- 
self intelligible, without the exegetical aid of a Luther 
or a Calvin, a Scott or a Henry, a Rosenmiiller, a 
Tholuck, a Lange, and a multitudinous host of other 
ancient and modern expositors ! What strange, what 
stupendous, delusion ! 

It is time, high time, for mankind to wake up to the 
fact, that whatever is really essential to our salvation 
is palpable to the most ordinary understanding, and 
that what is beyond the power of common sense com- 
prehension is not included in the means or conditions 
of salvation, but is simply matter for learned specula- 
tion or philosophic disquisition. For in what does it 
properly and mainly consist? In this, that Christ is 
our Saviour; that, accordingly, we must put ourtrustin 
him in order to be saved, and do what he requires of 
us, as far as is possible, or God gives us grace ; that if 

12 



234 THE DOCTRINE OF 

we do thus, God will deal mercifully towards us, and 
forgive us our sins: this, I conceive, is the sum of the 
Tvhole matter, in a few words ; and to comprehend it, 
observe it, and realize it, man is, — with the aid of the 
Holy Ghost, ready to co-operate with him in the attain- 
ment of all truth appertaining to his salvation, — fully 
competent. Of these indisputable facts the Apostles 
were well aware, and when, therefore, they wrote their 
epistles to individuals or congregations, or to Chris- 
tians composing more numerous bodies, such as those 
designated as strangers, elect, scattered over different 
parts of Asia Minor, 1 Peter, i. 1-2, they habitually 
invited their attention to the prominent facts in the 
Christian system of redemption, and exhorted them 
diligently to conform to them in their thoughts and 
actions ; thus, with the implied or expressed assisting 
grace from on high, making sure of their salvation. It 
would be exceedingly strange, indeed, if the heaven- 
sent teachers of salvation, and among these the ador- 
able Son of God himself, had taught a way of salva- 
tion which nobody could understand without the pre- 
sumi)tuous interposition of uninspired man, and that 
too onlij after the lapse of generations and centuries! 
What, to come to save, and to suffer and die to save, 
and yet not save, because nobody can form a proper 
idea either of the meaning or the terms involved in 
the plan of salvation without the dicta of human de- 
vices or the creeds of sects! Preposterous I Man's 
competence to an intelligent appreciation of the design 
and conditions of the New-Testament system of re- 
demption is clearly set forth in the duty which Christ 



THE LORD'S SUPPER. 135 

and the Apostles enjoined upon him, in the repeated 
admonitions personally to investigate the sense and 
scope of the word of God. To this fact I shall now 
call attention.* 



••'■ In the Reformed Church Messenger of the 2d of February, 1872, 
appears an article on Dr. Krauth's " Conservative Eefornaation," by 
J. W. N., — that is, I presume, by Dr. J. W. Nevin. The following 
extract, though concise, essentially represents the writer's views, as 
stated in that article, on the rank and use of the Bible in the Chris- 
tian Church : 

" Neither Luther, nor Zwingle, nor Melanchthon, nor Calvin pro- 
fessed at all to stand upon the principles of the Bible and private 
judgment in any such naked view as that taught in a late number 
of the ' Catholic World,' on Authority in Matters of Faith. They 
had a very clear sense of Christianity as a Divine historical fact, 
which had come down to them through the general life of the Church 
along with the Bible, on objective matters of faith in this form, which 
was for them older and deeper than the text of the Bible," etc. 

Here we cannot but notice the assertion of a principle which 
favors the introduction into the Protestant Chui'ch of a kind of 
Christian Talmndism. The Reformers, I remark, unanimously re- 
jected, as dogmatic authority, the traditions of the Roman Catholic 
Church, and made the Bible the sole normative ground in matters of 
faith and a Christian life; but this fact, I regret to say, does not seem 
to satisfy Dr. Nevin. Christianity, in his opinion, it appears, is 
sound and uuexceptionally orthodox only then when it combines 
the traditions of a corrupt Church with the word of God ! The indi- 
vidual, either as clergyman or layman, has no interpretative Scrip- 
ture rights ; these, alas ! are vested only in the dominant party, or 
the proper hierophants of the Church. The Divine afflatus is, ac- 
cording to the Gospel, the free gift of God to every believing, peni- 
tent soul, made by Christ " a king and priest unto God," Revelation, 
i. 6, V. 10 ; but the Church, in its modest sacerdotal capacity, lays ex- 
clusive claim to the exalted prerogative, and hence man must no 
longer presume to exercise his Christian functions autonomically, as 
it is fit that he should, but he must — to be saved — renounce all claims 



136 'iJIE DOCTRINE OF 

In John, V. 39, Jesus bids the Jews "search the 
Scriptures," adding that " they bore testimony of him." 

to free agency, and ever humbly sit at the feet of some infallible 
Gamaliel ! 

In common with many others, I have been led to think that the 
writers of the New Testament were inspired men, and that the Reve- 
lation, transmitted to us in the Gospel, was the true and all-sufficient 
word of God; but it appears now that I was wrong, and that as the 
Jew had his Talmudic reveries beside the Old Testament, so the 
Christian must have his in addition to the New! It is a question 
perhaps not easily solved, whether the Pilates of the palace or the 
teachers in the sanctuary have done most harm to the Son of God ! 

The gist of the position advanced by Dr. Nevin seems to resolve 
itself into the following propositions : There is an outward testimony 
in behalf of the Holy Scriptures and the Church, — the testimony of 
the Holy Ghost, obtained immediately from the source whence is de- 
rived the Christian Revelation itself; in consequence of this testi- 
mony, faith is produced, and this faith, thus produced, becomes, in a 
most important sense, an independent witness of the truth of Reve- 
lation. Scripture and the Church, therefore, only serve to bring 
Christ into view in his historical aspect; but they cannot originate 
the faith that sees in him the "Son of the Living God": this can 
come only from the light of his own presence by the j)Ower of the 
Holy Ghost. Such faith has the assurance that it is true as well as 
the object towards which it is directed. It says to Scripture and the 
Church : "Now I believe, not because of your saying; fur I have 
heard and seen for myself, and know that this is indeed the Christ, 
the Saviour of the world." 

I have always been led to think that the Holy Ghost influenced 
the human mind through the Gospel, and not by means of a new and 
independent Revelation, made by our Lord Jesus Christ, in virtue of 
a special economy of grace, through the Holy Ghost, in contradis- 
tinction of the written word of God. Luther's exegesis on sanctifica- 
tion, in the third article of the Apostles' Creed, is decidedly averse to 
the Doctor's hypothesis. As to the Westminster Catechism, to which 
Doctor Nevin refers for authentication of his views, it clearly testifies 
against a dualistic Revelation in the Christian system of redemption ; 



THE LORD'S SUFFER. j 37 

Even these priest-ridden Jews are deemed capable of 
making an accurate investigation of the writings of the 

for it teaches that the " inward work of the Holy Sjjirit bears witness 
htj and with the Word in our hearts."* 

The following specimen of Protestant pravity deserves to be held 
up to the serious consideration and profound disgust of every evan- 
gelical Christian ; a Christian who loves Christ more than Loyola, 
and sets a higher value vipon the Gospel than upon papal practices, 
wickedly aiming to overthrow the authority of Divine revelation, 
and to rob the followers of Christ of the inalienable right of private 
judgment. 

In the Lutheran Observer of the 1st of March, 1872, I find, on 
page 3, an article from the pen of J. H. W. Stuckenbei-g, — meaning, 
no doubt, the distinguished Lutheran clergyman bearing that name, 
— entitled " From St. Louis to Rome. Professors Baumstark and 
Preuss." " On the 12th of September, 1869, H. Baumstark, professor 
of the theological seminary of the Missouri Synod, at St. Louis, en- 
tered the Romish Church ,• and on the 25th of last January, Doctor 
Preuss, professor in the same seminary, followed in his footsteps. 
These facts should certainly lead the members of that Synod, and all 
who bear the Lutheran name, to serious reflection. Tractarianism 
in the Episcopal Church led more than three hundred English min- 
isters, and many laymen of that Church, into the Romish Church. 
These facts speak more eloquently and convincingly than all asser- 
tions that Tractarianism does not lead to Rome. In the German Re- 
formed and Lutheran Churches there are similar tendencies, which 
only the blind fail to see, and which it is wicked to conceal. 

"Several months ago, I read some statements which seem to throw 
light on the tendency in the St. Louis Seminary. I read them to a 
Missouri Synod man, and he urged me to publish them. But I re- 
frained from doing so, because I thought that the publication of 
those statements might serve only to foster useless controversy. But 
I believe it to be a duty now to publish them, so that men may see 
what the tendency in the theological seminary in St. Louis is. 

"About the same time that Professor H. Baumstark went from that 
seminary into the Romish Church, a brother of his, in Germany, also 

* See Reformed Church Messenger, March 20, 1872. 

12* 



138 THE DOCTRINE OF 

Old Testament, in respect to matters appertaining to 
their salvation. Paul and Silas, having been treated 
with much contumely at Thessalonica, the brethren 

found his way to Rome. They then published a book, entitled 'Our 
"Ways to the Catholic Church/ in which they give an account of their 
change. Some statements made in this book, by the former Missouri 
professor, are very significant. From a German religious monthly, 
which gives a review of the book of the two brothers, I take the fol- 
lowing account, given by II. Baumstark. He says that in St. Louis 
he became a devoted and grateful pupil of Prof. Walther, who, on 
the whole, occupied the same standpoint he had thus far held. There 
was, however, one thing in the theological seminary at St. Louis 
which surprised him, namely, the entire neglect of the study of the 
sacred Scriptures. Baumstark says: 'Of all the various subjects 
taught in the Lutheran theological seminary, — of which dogmatics 
took up most of the time, — exegesis was not at all represented. For 
the two hours a week which were assigned to this subject were taken 
up with dictations of explanations of old Lutheran theologians on 
the Sunday gospels and epistles.' But why was the study of the 
Scriptures so neglected ? Perhaps the following statement of Baum- 
stark will make the answer evident. He declares that in St. Louis 
he heard for the first time the principle announced, 'that the Sym- 
bolical books are not to be interpreted by the Scriptures; but, on 
the contrary, the Scriptures are to bo interpreted by the Symbolical 
books : lUiits nicht die Sj/inbolischcn Buecher nuch dcr Schri/t auszuleijcn 
eeieu, aondern ttmijekchrt die Schri/t nach den Si/mbuliiicheii IJuecheni." 
These are the statements of one who was a student in the Mis- 
souri institutions, then a preacher and zealous defender of the cxclu- 
siveness of the Missouri Synod, and afterwards a professor in Iheir 
theological seminary. They throw a flood of light on the tendencies 
in the seminary, and also on the course of Baumstark and Preuss. 
With such facts before us, it does not seem strange that the step from 
the seminary into the Romish Church is so easy. The only wonder 
is that men, teaching such doctrines and thus treating the Scriptures, 
still claim to be Lutherans. And when such men claim to be the 
only representatives and authoritative interpreters of Lutherauism, 
wo can only regard them with |>ity. 



THE LORD'S SUPPER. 139 

"sent them by night to Berea." "These Bereans," 
we are told, " were more noble than those in Thes- 
salonica, in that they received the word with all 
readiness of mind, and searched the Scriptures daily, 
whether those things were so": Acts, xvii. 10, 11. 
These singularly judicious Bereaus, thus employing 
reason and personal research to ascertain the truth of 
the doctrine proclaimed to them by these distinguished 
missionaries, deserve, on account of this wise and em- 
inently proper conduct, in relation to a matter of so 
much importance to their salvation, to have a monu- 
ment erected to their memory more durable than brass, 
more precious than gold, and high as the heavens. 
Owing to this praiseworthy searching of the Scrip- 
tures, the Bereans found that the apostolic teaching 
was true, and they believed: Acts, xvii. 12. There 
would, doubtless, be vastly more Christian faith, not 
hypocritical faith-seeming, if it was based upon the 
result of candid personal investigation, instead of blind 
confidence and servile submission to hereditary, often 
unbiblical, dogmas of a Church. 

Again, 1 Thessalonians, v. 21, St. Paul enjoins it as 
a paramount duty on all Christians, to " prove all 
things, and hold fast that which is good." To do this 
involves not only the ability to judge what is good, 
but also the right to reject or accept as is deemed 
proper, thus forming an independent decision, and 
being the absolute arbiters of our action. "Behold," 
writes the same indefatigable Apostle, in his Letter to 
the Romans, ii. 17, 18, "thou art called a Jew, and 
restest in the law, and makest thy boast of God, and 



140 THE DOCTRINE OF 

knowest his will, and approvcst— after proper dis- 
crimination — the things that are more excellent, being 
instructed out of the law," etc. This praise, thus 
lavished upon the Jews at Rome, seems well deserved, 
and implies a habit of carefully searching the Scrip- 
tures, independently of " the commandments of men" 
and " the traditions of the elders." High encomiums 
are bestowed by the Apostle of the Gentiles, in 1 
Corinthians, ii. 15, IG, on the wise and exemplary 
practice of the judicious follower of Christ to self- 
determine his individual faith, asserting, "That he 
that is spiritual— has the mind of Christ— judgeth all 
things, yet he himself is judged of no man." In the 
following passage, recorded in 1 Corinthians, vii. 23, 
the Christian is exhorted, by all means, to maintain 
his religious independence as well as personal integrity, 
and never to lose sight of his individual responsibility, 
in these emphatic words : " Ye are bought with a price ; 
be not ye the servants of men." ' With slight variation 
of expression, this timely and salutary warning is thus 
repeated, by the same Apostle, in Galatians, v. 1, where 
he says: "Stand fast, therefore, in the liberty where- 
with Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled 
again with the yoke of bondage." I add, that whether 
the yoke is a Jewish yoke, as was the case here, or is 
a Christian yoke, threatening us, as at present, on all 
sides, it behooves us, according to the freedom-loving 
Apostle, to be upon our guard, and resolutely, as well 
as at all hazards, to stand fast in our Christ-given 
liberty. The text, in 2 Timothy, iii. 16, 17, next 
claims a brief attention. It relates especially to the 



THE LORD'S SUPPER. 141 

Christian minister, and shows conclusively that he, in 
his iDclividual capacity, has not only a perfect right to 
use the Scriptures in spite of sacerdotal control or ec- 
clesiastical prescription, but that he can use them most 
profitably and savingly. The words are the following: 
" All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is 
profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for 
instruction in righteousness : that the man of God may 
be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works." 
Finally, though this Scripture declaration of equal 
rights is, by no means, confined to the foregoing teach- 
ing, I shall call attention to but one more text, relevant 
to this interesting and important subject, recorded in 
Romans, xiv. 4, where the Apostle thus nobly asserts 
the absolute individual independence of every Chris- 
tian in matters of faith and practice, without regard 
to Synod, Ministerium, or "the thunders of the Yati- 
can." " AYho art thou," thus writes the intrepid 
Apostle, "that judgest another man's servant? To 
his own master, he standeth or falleth. Yea, he shall 
be holden up: for God is able to make him stand." 

Bible Societies send the word of God, translated, I 
am informed, into one hundred and forty-eight lan- 
guages and dialects, everywhere, without comment or 
proviso, and thus indorse as well as premise uncon- 
strained personal research. It is through means of 
these philanthropic institutions that there circulate at 
this time forty-three millions of copies of the word of 
God among no less than six hundred millions of human 
beings. Here the very cheering fact is presented to 
our notice, that the Holy Scriptures are disseminated 



142 THE DOCTRINE OF 

among about one-half of the inhabitants of the globe, 
without a priestly veto prefixed or a party creed ap- 
pended to them ; and yet these humane and indefat- 
igable societies seem to think that the myriad souls 
to whom they are sent may be saved ! Thus, then, 
I think I have demonstrated that the Bible, not man 
or human dictation, is the only authority in faith and 
Christian life.* 



^•" In the Biblical Repositor}/ and Quarterly Observer, of April, 
1835, C. E. Stowe, Professor of Biblical Literature in Cincinnati 
Lane Seminary, in an article on "Expository Preaching," etc., gives 
utterance to the following truly evangelical and admirable senti- 
ments: "Again — if there is an authorized interpreter of the Bible, 
his interpretations must be understood by the common laws of lan- 
guage ; and why .can we not understand revelation itself by the com- 
mon laws of language as well as the interpreter of revelation ? What 
is the value of a revelation that cannot be understood without an 
authorized interpreter? And what is the use of an authorized in- 
terpreter to a revelation that can be understood without one? One 
or the other is certainly needless ; and so needless an expenditure of 
means does not look like the simplicity of the Divine economy in 
other things. The Bible gives no hint of any such power of author- 
itative interpretation, and reason rejects the whole theory as entirely 
repugnant to its own nature." 

The Professor adds : " The language of the Bible is the language 
of men, otherwise it would be of no use to men. And it is to be un- 
derstood just as all other human language is understood. It is ad- 
dressed to the common sense of men, and common sense is to be con- 
sulted in its interpretation." 



THE LORD'S SUPPER. I43 



CREEDS ARE NECESSARY ONLY WHERE THERE ARE 
SECTS, BUT SECTARIANISM IS FORBIDDEN, 1 CO- 
RINTHIANS, I. 10-13, ///. 3-11 J THEREFORE CREEDS 
ARE FORBIDDEN. THIS BEING THE CASE, THE 
DOGMA OF THE REAL PRESENCE OCCUPIES FOR- 
BIDDEN GROUND, AND IS ITSELF, OF COURSE,— AS 
HUMAN PRESCRIPTION,— FORBIDDEN. 



Many persons are of opinion that sectism is de- 
sirable as a powerful incentive to Christian zeal and 
activity, or, at least, as a necessary means to elicit 
emulation among the different denominations of Chris- 
tians, and thus to call forth the latent energies of the 
faithful, as well as cherish and promote a lively in- 
terest and proper enthusiasm in the cause of religion 
generally ; but such views, though they are not en- 
tirely devoid of truth, are altogether antagonistic to 
the spirit and design of Christianity, and deserve no 
notice, except in so far as they are an evidence of the 
remarkable manner in which truth and error may 
happen to converge towards incidental points of ap- 
proximation. 

Religious creeds can be necessary only in sectdom ; 
or, in other words, when the Church of Christ is in a 
state of sectism : torn asunder, and bleeding from 



144 THE DOCTRINE OF 

wounds, inflicted b}^ mad factions contending for the 
mastery. Then it is that lines of demarkation are re- 
quired, and distinctive Shibboleths, as watchwords 
and symbols of recognition, must needs be introduced 
and scrupulously observed. But as sectism is, as I 
shall soon have occasion to show, contrary to the 
Scriptures, and, besides, a grievous and most deplora- 
ble evil, as well as a willful and wicked disintegration 
and distraction of the body of Christ, so, of course, 
all human creeds are not only superfluous and unne- 
cessary, but absolutely criminal ; for the}" are an ex- 
press and open violation of "the unity of the spirit in 
the bond of peace," Ephesians, iv. 3. 

" Nur der Glauhens-Zwanrj macht SeJcten mid erhaelt sie." 

The origin of sects, except where persecution has 
done its demoniac work, is, in every instance, owing to 
impure motives or false principles of religion. Pride, 
obstinacy, ambiJ;ion, hatred, etc., and, therefore, unholy 
passions, have ordinarily given rise to the hydra-headed 
monster of sect-Christianity: the glory of the vulgar, 
the contempt and pity of the enlightened. 

When it is affirmed that creeds are necessary to 
meet and reconcile the discrepant views prevalent 
among the various divisions of the Christian Church, 
and thus to secure harmony and combined activity 
among these creed-bound professors, the position is 
false, and the end sought to be attained is far from 
being always realized, as the following facts will suf- 
ficiently testify. In 1577 the famous Form of Concord 
was comp(jsed, " in which," writes Haweis, the ec- 



THE LORD'S SUFFER. 145 

clesiastical historian, " the real manducation of Christ's 
body and blood in the Eucharist was established, and 
heresy and excommunication laid on all who refused 
this as an article of faith, with pains and penalties to 
be enforced by the secular arm," etc. Here we meet 
with the disagreeable fact, so often marring the mani- 
festation of religious life, that instead of a peaceful, 
voluntary agreement in this dogma of *' the real man- 
ducation of the body and blood of Christ," secular 
compulsion is resorted to, and unanimity of faith en- 
forced by acts of violence and injustice. So far, indeed, 
was this Form of Concord from reconciling the dis- 
cordant elements in the Lutheran Church, especially 
from suppressing the much-dreaded and heartily-hated 
crypto-Calvinistic and Zwinglian views on the Lord's 
Supper, that the seeds of contention and animosity 
germinated with renewed vigor, while the rage of 
parties surged and foamed with redoubled violence, in 
consequence of which this celebrated Form of Con- 
cord obtained the sarcastic title of Concordia Discors, 
— the Concord of Discord. 

Of this remarkable Symbolic production, Mosheim 
speaks in these expressive words : '' It immediately 
met with a warm opposition from the Reformed, and 
also from all those who were either secretly attached 
to their doctrine, or who at least were desirous of 
living in concord and communion with them, from a 
laudable zeal for the common interests of the Protestant 
cause. Nor was their opposition at all unaccountable, 
since they plainly perceived that this Form removed 
all the flattering hopes they had entertained of seeing 

13 



146 TEE DOCTRIXE OF 

the divisions that reigned among the friends of re- 
ligious liberty happily healed, and entirely excluded 
the Reformed from the communion of the Lutheran 
Church. Hence they were filled with indignation 
against the authors of this new Confession of Faith, 
and exposed their uncharitable proceedings in writing 
full of spirit and vehemence. The Swiss doctors, with 
Hospinian at their head, the Belgic divines, those of 
the Palatinate, together with the principalities of An- 
halt and Baden, declared war against the Form of 
Concord. And accordingly from this period the Lu- 
theran, and more especially the Saxon doctors, were 
charged with the disagreeable task of defending this 
new creed and its compilers in many laborious pro- 
ductions. Xor were the followers of Zwingle and 
Calvin the only opposers of this Form of Concord: it 
found adversaries even in the very bosom of Lutheran- 
ism, and several of the most eminent churches of that 
communion rejected it with such firmness and resolu- 
tion, that no arguments or entreaties could engage 
them to admit it as a rule of faith, or even as a means 
of instruction. It was rejected by the churches of 
Hessia, Pomerania, Xiiremberg, Holstein, Silesia, Den- 
mark, Brunswick, and others. Frederick the Second, 
King of Denmark, as soon as he received a copy of 
the Form in question, threw it into the fire, anchsaw it 
consumed before his eyes. The ill fate of this famous 
confession, in the principalities of Lignitz and Brieg, 
is no less matter of history." 

It is surprising that people, claiming to be Christians 
of a high order of virtue and intelligence, should, by 



THE LORD'S SUPPER. 14-7 

resorting to compulsory means, presume to impose 
their peculiar religious views upon the rest of man- 
kind, thinking, doubtless, in the blindness and extrava- 
gance of their unholy zeal, to do God a signal service. 
In principle at least, such bigoted and unamiable con- 
duct, often aggravated by perfidy of purpose, is on a 
par with the cruel and bloody deeds of "the Holy 
Office," and it, therefore, behooves us sedulously to 
guard against it, lest we too become tainted with the 
intolerance of uUi^a-montanism. When will Chris- 
tians learn that strict unanimity of dogmatic views is 
as impossible as it is undesirable and pernicious ? God 
has ordained that the human mind should differ in its 
individual manifestations of powers and modes of 
action, as well as in the idiosyncrasy of its disposition 
and its passions. Human sentiments, interrogated by 
Revelation, are as naturally various and distinctively 
individual as the song or the color of the bird ; the 
anatomy, the locomotion, or the habits of the different 
rapacious or gentle beasts; the form and structure of 
the foliage of the separate families or even of the 
same species of trees ; or, finall}^, the flavor and use of 
the manifold fruit-productions of the vegetable king- 
dom. Unanimity in religious views, were it practicable, 
would inevitably result, like unalterable creed-subscrip- 
tion, in an insurmountable barrier to all Christian ad- 
vancement. I am willing, therefore, that even the crass 
and unbiblical doctrine of the Real Presence should have 
free scope among religionists, if opinions, more con- 
sonant with evangelical Christianity, and calculated to 
secure a healthy tone of sentiment, cannot be consci- 



148 THE DOCTRINE OF 

entiously entertained ; for it is far preferable to allow, 
and even to foster, diversity in dogmas, than to aim at 
universal sameness, and thus make " the waters of life" 
a stagnant pool, "the bread of heaven" a mouldy, 
worm-eaten loaf. If professors did not differ in their 
religious convictions, they could have no distinct Chris- 
tian consciousness, no personal amenabilit}^ ; and they 
would, therefore, appear before the bar of God as a 
huge multiple monster, animated by one insensate, de- 
generate soul, worthless on earth, and unfit for heaven. 
When our Lord and the Apostles inculcate unanimity 
of religious belief, they simply mean a general consent 
to the proposition that Christ is our only Saviour, and 
that we must all look to him or his way of salvation 
in order to be made God-like and happy; or, in other 
words, to be saved. It by no means denotes that all 
Christ's followers must contemplate these truths in 
precisely the same manner, or. carry them out in an 
absolutely uniform and literally concordant method. 
All the heterogeneous views which are now professed 
by the multitudinous sects which divide and disgrace 
Christendom, under the assumed sanction of human 
creeds, could just as w^ell be exi)ressed or cherished 
within the pale of a common brotherhood of Christians, 
provided Christian charity and forbearance were, as 
is fit they should be, mutually and cordially practiced. 
It is evident that maid^iud cannot be of one mind on 
the all-important but variform subject of religion, from 
the fact attesting the existence of so many sects, arrayed 
against each other in hostile attitude, or dandling in 
sham-love; all divided by diverse and often conflicting 



THE LORD'S SUPPER. 149 

creeds : and jet men speak of existing unanimity : a 
thousand sects or_modes of religious manifestations 
are said to exist and flourish in the various regions of 
the globe, and there must, therefore, be a thousand 
diverse unanimities among the religionists of the 
earth ! Hence, instead of any longer vaingloriously 
boasting of their orthodox creeds or immaculate con- 
fessions, their numerical strength, and prosperous 
condition, let the various Christian sects who have 
virtually seceded from the pale of the Christian Church 
— considered as Christ's body — discard their inimical 
and often irreconcilable Shibboleths * and. humbly re- 



* Sectarianism is a powerful obstacle to the prompt and successful 
promulgation of the Gospel in heathen lands, and everywhere cor- 
roborates the Apostle's assertion, that the sectarists, instead of dis- 
playing the '' stature of the fullness of Christ," are — according to 
1 Corinthians, iii. 1 — carnal, and mere babes "in Christ." 

"There is still," writes C. Edwards Lester, in his work, ^' The 
Glory and Shame of England," "another obstacle to the spread of 
Christianity, not only in India, but in all portions of the pagan 
world, of which it gives me pain to speak. I refer to the sectarian- 
ism of the missionaries; and I speak of it with the greatest pain; 
for I do not love to blame those self-denying men who have been 
willing to exchange the friends, the literature, the happiness of an 
English or an American home, with all the sweet charities of domes- 
tic life, for the dark abodes of idolatry, etc. : but I have felt this mat- 
ter most deeply, and I must allude to it. 

"There is, in fact, I believe, far less sectarianism among mission- 
aries than among those who send them; and, in illustration of this, 
we have only to look over Great Britain and America, and enumerate 
the hundreds of sects, and listen to their strifes, controversies, and 
bickerings. Still, the missionaries are by no means free from this 
unhallowed spirit; and the heathen is not so blind but that he can 
see how repugnant to the precepts of Christ is the very existence of 

13* 



150 THE DOCTRINE OF 

penting of their sins and follies, return to the fold of 
Christ — I mean of course the sheep-io\(\. of Christ, not 



sects. Christ declared that a kingdom divided against itself could 
not stand. 

" The heathen find two missionaries among them from England or 
America, to teach the same great S3-stem of faith, — belief in the same 
Saviour and preparation for the same heaven ; and yet the Baptist 
spreads the Lord's Table, and forbids his brother to come to the 
feast !■•• Perhaps his brother has come from a distant station, and 
called to take him by the hand and rest awhile in his house. They 
will pray together, weep together, and appear to love each other; but 
they cannot sit together at the great Christian Feast. "Will the Hin- 
doo call this caste t or what ? 

"A fact was related to me by a missionary who had been several 
years in India, which is in point. I had, said he, baptized, by 
sprinkling, a native in India, and he seemed to understand the na- 
ture and feel the power of Christianity. Being obliged to leave my 
station for awhile, a Baptist brother, at my request, came to take 
charge of my school during my absence. On a certain occasion he 
was conversing with the native to whom I alluded on the subject of 
baj)tism. Ascertaining that I had performed that rite upon him, the 
Baptist entered into an argument to convince him that he had not 
been baptized; that, whatever I might have said, he could be sure 
that he had not been baptized; and that, if he would be saved, he 
must be immersed. The poor heathen shook his head, saying, 
'Ah! Boodah is a better liod !' and returned to the embrace of 
his idols. I saw him after this, and told him that I would im- 
merse him if he chose; for I considered the form of baptism of 
little consequence. But ho replied, ' I can't tell who speaks the 
most wisely ; though I am certain you cannot both have the same 
religion.' 

" It is well known that the Baptist Church in America, after many 
bitter complaints, bus seceded from the American Bible Society, be- 

* Tills is a gooil dciil like refusing to cxcliango pulpits or to commune 
with Cliristiiins who entertain no sympathy for the dogma of the Real 
Prosiuce. — Q. 



THE LORD'S SUPPER. 151 

the i(;oZ/-fo]d of "Holy Mother Church," — and doing 
towards each other^ as they wish others should do to- 
wards them, live in the unity of the spirit and the 
bonds of peace, through Jesus Christ, each honestly 
founding his faith upon the evidence of a personal 
Scripture research, and so governing his walk and con- 
versation as to be both recognized and respected by 
all sincere followers of Christ as a worthy member of 
the same " holy universal Church." If this is not done, 
and done speedily too, Romanism will inflict a grave 
and fatal injury upon the Protestant Church, as its 
Jesuitic chicanery and intrigues are ever, with hypo- 
critical fawning, and guise of fraternal sympathy and 
regard, doing all it is possible for self-interested cun- 
ning to do to sow the baneful seeds of discontent in 
the minds of unsuspecting Protestants, too often vacil- 
lating and unsatisfied in their miserable, disintegrated 
state of a deplorable sectism, and to create a morbid 
longing for a return to the ample, loving bosom of 
Romanism. The option is between Christ and Belial, 



cause they would not print a new edition of the Bible, and change 
the phraseology of those parts which speak of baptism ! 

" The Established Church have good bishops and ministers at their 
missionary stations, but they deny the validity of all other ordina- 
tions. They tell the heathen that the Scotch or the American Pres- 
byterian or Baptist missionary is no minister ,• no ambassador of 
Christ; has no right to administer the sacred ordinances of the 
Church. It makes the heart sick to contemplate these things. The 
pagan looks on, and more firmly adheres to his idols." 

Scores of similar examples of a wicked and hateful sectism might 
readily be adduced, but, for the present, at least, the foregoing in- 
cidents may suffice. 



152 ^//A' DOCTRINE OF 

what say you? Will you be one in Christ, tolerating, 
in the spirit of love and magnanimity, diversities of 
views, while all cleave to Christ, as their only hope, 
and all strive to excel each other in oflSces of love 
and good works, thus verifying and sanctifying your 
title to the Christian name, — and stand? or continue 
divided, Rud fall, never again foi^ise? For a divided, 
social body cannot prosper or endure, as is plain 
from our Lord's teaching, Matthew, xii. 25: "Every 
kingdom divided against itself is brought to desola- 
tion ; and every city or house divided against itself 
shall not stand." 

The Apostles of our Lord were presumptively all 
Christians — Judas I have no authority to judge — and 
followers of the Redeemer; but how differently were 
their opinions of Christianity expressed, and how di- 
verse, therefore, must have been their modes of faith ! 
The Christology of Paul and John is, by no means, 
the same, while again it is strikingly different from 
that of Peter and James. The latter exhibited Chris- 
tianity from a purely practical standpoint; the former 
indulge in the thc^ological contemplations common 
to the Oriental or Gnostic philoso])hy. Where the 
Apostles differ in their method of teaching the Gospel 
there is room for speculation and the use of logic, but 
where, on the contrary, they agree, our faith will be 
fixed and positive, and our obedience prompt and cer- 
tain. Thus tliere is unity in diversity, and even a 
Judas may have his name in the Church record. For, 
is he bad, where should he go to become good? is he 
not already in the Church ? And is he good, he will 



THE LORD'S SUPPER. 153 

neither need nor desire to go where he cannot be any 
better. * 

* " Truth," writes D'Aubigne, "roay be compared to the light of 
the sun. The light comes from heaven colorless, and ever the same ; 
and yet it takes different hues on earth, varying according to the ob- 
jects on which it falls. How dull would be this visible creation if all 
its boundless variety of shape and color were to give place to an 
unbroken uniformity ! And may we not add, how melancholy would 
be its aspect if all created beings did but compose a solitary and vast 
unity ! 

"The unity which comes from Heaven doubtless has its place, but 
the diversity of human nature has its proper place also. In religion 
we must neither leave out God nor man. Without unity, in Christian 
jyrinciple, your religion cannot be of God; without diversity, it can- 
not be the religion of man. And it ought to be of both. Would you 
banish from creation a law that its Divine author has imposed upon 
it, namely, that of boundless diversity ? ' Things without life giving 
sound,' said Paul, ' whether pipe or harp, except they give a dis- 
tinction in the sounds, how sh9,ll it be known what is piped or harped ?' 
1 Corinthians, xiv. 7. In religion there is a diversity, the result of 
distinction of individuality, and which, by consequence, must subsist 
even in heaven," etc. 

But it is Robinson, the worthy pastor of the emigrants of the May- 
Flower, and distinguished founder of the Independents, whose views 
eminently express the true Scripture standpoint of a normal Chris- 
tian society or church. I quote from the remarks of the editor of the 
Biblical Repository and Quarterly Observer in the April number of 
1835 : " From the 'Apology' of Kobinson, it appears that in regard 
to the rule of faith, they — the Independents — entirely disclaimed 
human authority, and distinctly maintained the right of every man 
to judge of the sense of the Scriptures for himself, of trying doctrines 
by them, and of worshiping according to his apprehension of them. 
In July, 1620, Robinson preached a sermon which 'breathed a noble 
spirit of Christian liberty.' ' I charge you,' said he to the parting 
congregation, ' before God and his blessed angels, that you follow 
me no further than you have seen me follow the Lord Jesus Christ. 
I am very confident that the Lord has more truth to break forth out 



154 THE I>OCTRL\E OF 

I shall now proceed to lay before the reader the 
important lessons which St. Paul imparts on this 
interesting and momentous theme, in 1 Corinthians, 
i. 10-13, iii. 3-11 ; and then, commending the subject 
of this article to the serious and prayerful attention of 
the Christian public, leave it to its doom, guarded sa- 
credly and safely in the hands of God. The Apostle 
thus pithily expresses himself, in the pathetic language 
of grief and expostulation : " Now I beseech you, breth- 
ren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all 
speak the same thing, and that thc^re be no divisions 
among you ; but that ye be perfectly joined together 
in the same mind and in the same judgment. For it 
hath been declared unto me of you, my brethren, by 
them which are of the house of Chloe, that there are 
contentions, among you. Now this I say, that every 
one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; 
and I of Cephas ; and I of Clirist. Is Christ divided ? 
was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the 
name of Paul ?" Turning to the other passage, we find 
this eminent servant of Christ discoursing in this lucid 
and impressive manner of solemn and stern rebuke : 
" Ye are yet carnal : for whereas there is among you en- 
vying, and strife, and divisions, are ye not carnal, and 
walk as men (men of the world) ? For while one saith, 
I am of Paul ; and another, lam of Apollos, are ye not 
carnal ? Who then is Paul, and who is Apollos, but 



of his holy word. I beseech you remember it as an article of your 
church covenant, that you be ready to receive whatever truth shall 
be made known to you from the written word of Ciod.'" 



THE LORD'S SUFFER. I55 

ministers hy whom ye believed, even as the Lord gave 
to every man f. I have planted, A polios watered ; but 
God gave the increase. So then neither is he that 
planteth anything,- neither he that watereth, but God 
that giveth the increase. Now he that planteth and 
he that watereth are one : and every man shall receive 
his own reward according to his own labor. For we 
are laborers together with God : ye are God's hus- 
bandry, ye are God's building. According to the 
grace of God which is given unto me, as a wise master- 
builder, I have laid the foundation, and another buiid- 
eth thereon. But let every man take heed how he 
buildeth thereupon. For other foundation can no man 
lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ," etc. 



15G THE DOCTRINE OF 



szEGOTion^ :x:. 

SOME OF THE DOGMAS OF THE LUTHERAN CHURCH 
HA VE FALLEN INTO DESUETUDE: A FACT WHICH EN- 
COURAGES THE HOPE THAT THE DOCTRINE OF THE 
REAL PRESENCE MA Y, EVENT CALL Y, MEET WITH A 
SIMILA R FA TE : B UT IN THE MEAN WHILE, THE VEN- 
ERABLE PARENT OF PROTESTANTISM MA YIN SOME 
MEASURE JUSTLY CLAIM SUPERIORITY OF PRAC- 
TICE VER THE OR Y. 



CHAPTER I. 

Immersion, in Theory, is a Lutheran Mode of Baptism ; in Practice, 
it is not observed. 

In a concise treatise appended to the Smaller Cate- 
chism, and embodied among the symbols of faith, in 
the Book of Concord, entitled "Das Taiifbuechlein," 
or the Baptismal Formulary, and addressed by Luther 
"To all Christian Readers," the Reformer gives a 
minute account of the liturgic services to be observed 
at the ])aptism of a child, and carefully points out the 
proper mode of conducting the solemn administration 
of this sacred and important rite. 

A number of striking ceremonies prescribed in this 
formulary — derived from the devices of a hoary and 
superstitious age, — I forbear to notice further than to 



TILE LORD'S SUPPER. 15^ 

remark that, at present, they are considered, in the 
words of England's immortal dramatist, " more hon- 
ored in the breach than in the observance." 

After a repetition of various extraordinary liturgical 
observances — taught in this formulary, and formerly ad- 
hered to with scrupulous exactness — we at length arrive 
at that stage in the baptismal solemnities when the im- 
pressive sacramental act is to be consummated, and 
the officiating priest to take the child and immerse it 
in the water of the Lavacrum or font, saying, as he 
discharges this part of his sacred functions, *' I bap- 
tize thee in the name of the Father, and of the Son, 
and of the Holy Grhost," etc. 

This mode of baptism Luther still seems to have 
approved, seven years after the presentation of the 
Augsburg Confession to the Emperor Charles Y., at 
the Diet of Augsburg, in 1530, in his Schmalkald Ar- 
ticles, page 308, in quoting — while treating of baptism 
— the words in Ephesians, v. 26 : "That he — Christ- 
might sanctify and cleanse it — the Church — with the 
loashing of water by the word." This view of baptism, 
I may state, is evidently but a repetition of the doc- 
trine of immersion, still practiced in the earlier period 
of the Reformation, and doubtless referred to in the 
Smaller Catechism, where, in the third paragraph on 
baptism, in proof of what he is saying, Luther calls at- 
tention to the passage in Titus, iii. 5, where the doctrine 
is advanced that we are saved "by theiuasliing of regen- 
eration, and the renewing of the Holy Ghost." I do not 
wish, however, to be understood to assert that Luther 
inculcated baptism by immersion only, but what I 

14 



158 THE DOCTRINE OF 

design especially to impress upou tbc reader's attention 
is, that the Keformcr devotes a separate treatise to 
this mode of baptism, while in other parts of his Con- 
fessional Works he only speaks of baptism generally, 
without allusion to any specific mode after which it 
should be administered, with the single exception, as 
far as I am aware, of a passage in his Larger Cate- 
chism, page 44*7, where he speaks of the doubts of 
cavilers as to the efficacy of the small quantity of water 
employed in baptism, " Saying, how can a handful of 
ivater do any good to the soul ?" In short, there seems 
to be no doubt that, in the era of the Eeformatiou, bap- 
tism by immersion was the common mode, aud that 
the exception to this practice was comparatively rare, 
and resorted to only in cases of emergency.* 

* In tlie American edition of the K"ew Edinburgh Encyclopaedia, 
vol. iii., part ii., page 236, appears an article on Eaptism, by Rev- 
erend James Nicol, in which the following interesting facts commend 
themselves to our earnest and respectful attention: "It is impossi- 
ble to mark the precise period when sprinkling was introduced. It 
is probable, however, that it was invented in Africa in the second 
century, in favor of clinics. 13ut it was so far from being approved 
by the church in general, that the Africans themselves did not 
account it valid. The first law for sprinkling was obtained in the 
following manner. Pope Stephen III., being driven from Home by 
Astuljjhus, King of the Lombards, in 753, fled to Pepin, who, a 
short time before, had usurped the crown of France. Whilst he re- 
mained there, the Monks of Cressy, in Brittany, consulted him, 
whether, in a case of necessity, baptism, performed by pouring water 
on the head of the infant, would be lawful. Stephen rei)lied that it 
would. Put though the truth of this fact should bo allowed, which 
some Catholics deny, yet pouring or sj)rinkling was only admitted 
in eases of necessity. It was not till 1311 that the legislature, in a 
couijcil held ut l;a\ tuna, declared immersion or sprinkling to be indif- 



THE LORD'S SUPPER. 159 

Such being the case, why is this Baptismal Formu- 
lary, teaching immersion Avith so much detail and rigid 
precision, to be subscribed by the Ev^angelical Lutheran 
ministers of the Symbolic School, or required to be 
treated as an article of faith, if it is not to be carried 



ferent. In this country — Great Britain, howevei', sprinkling was 
never practiced, in ordinary cases, till after the Reformation ; and in 
England, even in the reign of Edward VI., trine immersion, dipping 
first the right side, secondly, the left side, and last, the face of the 
infant, was commonly observed. But during the persecution of 
Mary, many persons, most of whom were Scotsmen, fled from Eng- 
land to Geneva, and there greedily imbibed the opinions of that 
church. In 1556, a book was published at that place, containing 
* The form of prayers and ministration of the sacraments, approved 
by the famous and godly learned man, John Calvin, in which the 
administrator is enjoined to take water in his hand and lay it upon 
the child's forehead.' These Scottish exiles, who had renounced the 
authority of the Pope, implicitly acknowledged the authority of Cal- 
vin ,• and, returning to their own country, with Knox at their head, in 
1559, established sprinkling in Scotland. From Scotland this practice 
made its way into England in the reign of Elizabeth ; but was not au- 
thorized by the established church. In the Assembly of Divines, held 
at Westminster, in 1643, it was keenly debated whether immersion or 
sprinkling should be adopted ; twenty-five voted for sprinkling, and 
twenty-four for immersion ; and even this small majority was obtained 
at the earnest request of Doctor Lightfoot, who had acquired gi-eat in- 
fluence in that assembly. Sprinkling is therefore the general practice 
of this country si?ice 1643. Many Christians, however, especially the 
Baptists, reject it. The Greek Church universally adhere to immer- 
sion." 

Comparing these very significant facts with Luther's Immersion 
Formulary, noticed in the text, and his almost total silence on other 
modes of baptism, the conclusion seems warranted that immersion 
was the ordinary or prevalent form, in which the sacrament of bap- 
tism was administered in Germany during the period, at least, of the 
Lutheran Reformation. 



IGO THE DOCTRINE OF 

out in practice? The doctrine of the Keal Presence, 
also subscribed, is held to be inviolable, both in theory 
and in practice, and made a cardinal or central-dogma of 
faith, while the doctrine of sacramental immersion is 
coolly and habitually ignored. What daring foe has 
presumed to make this breach in the pristine faith of 
Lutherauism ? Besides, what good reason can be 
assigned, that Luther's opinion, that the bread and 
wine in the Lord's Supper are the real, hiimajilike 
body and blood of our Lord, should be held in greater 
esteem and veneration than his injunction to the min- 
istering priest in " the Taufbuechlein," — the Baptismal 
Formulary, — "To take the child and immerse it in the 
water "? Such discrimination is tantamount to hon- 
oring Luther's authority in the one Sacrament, and 
treating it with disrespect and neglect in the other; 
and yet all' the dogmas in the Book of Concord, both 
great and small, are to be subscribed, and, of course, 
it should seem, rigidly carried out ! This, I conceive, 
is evidence of great inconsistency, yet it encourages 
the hope that faith in the Keal Presence may eventually 
be recognized only in history.* 

* That the Anabaptists fouud it expedient to repeat the rite of bap- 
tism upon those who came over to their communion, is, I presume, 
no proof that only or mainlt/ non-immersion modes of baptism were 
in vogue in the age of the Iloforuiation, but rather dcnotive of the fact 
that the first bajjtism had been administered to infants instead of 
adults. 



THE LORD'S SUPPER. 161 



CHAPTER 11. 

Auricular Confession appears among the Articles of Faith in the 
Book of Concord, but is, at least in this Country, not observed. 

As an article of faith, auricular confession is not 
practiced by any of the different branches of the Lu- 
theran Church in this country, not even by the Mis- 
sourians, — at least not in their aggregate capacity; 
though, to judge from former statements in this Work, 
they seem to oscillate somewhat inauspiciously between 
Wittenberg and Rome, and to be most likely, there- 
fore, to give it a prominent place in their liturgic 
observances. 

Prior to the union of the Protestant Churches in 
Prussia, auricular confession was a chief part of the 
ritual of the Lutheran Church. Instead of it, there 
has been introduced in this country the "Order of 
Service, Preparatory to the Lord's Supper ": a change 
in this dogma similar to that now observed in the 
Prussian empire. Those, therefore, who have hereto- 
fore reproached the Lutheran Church in the United 
States with devotion to this papal relic of a past age, 
may hence be supposed to be undeceived. 

According to the eleventh article of the Augsburg 
Confession, private absolution, or, in other words, auri- 
cular confession, is to be retained in the liturgic service 
of the Lutheran Church. In Schott's " Unaltered 
Augsburg Confession," we read that ''private abso- 
14* 



ir;2 THE DOCTRINI-: OF 

lution ought to be retained in the churches, and not 
be rejected entirely." This is not at all, I conceive, a 
correct statement; for the Augsburg Confession does 
not saj a word about not " entirely rejecting''^ private 
absolution, but, on the contrary, it requires that it 
should be retained, and not suffered to fall into disuse. 
The Latin copy of this Confession, by Miiller, simply 
says : " Quod absolutio privata in ecclesiis retinenda 
sit," — that is, that private confession should be retained 
in the churches, without the admonition not to reject 
of suffer it to fall into disuse, and also without Schott's 
addition, that it should be retained, "and not rejected 
entirely." 

Evidently Luther wished auricular confession to be 
retained in the Church, as one of its most important 
and useful articles of faith. Thus, in the Schmal- 
kald Articles, page 309, he expresses himself in the 
following emphatic language : "As absolution, or the 
l)ardoning power of the keys, is an important means 
of comforting and tranquillizing sin-stricken and dis- 
quieted souls, and is, besides, one of Christ's institu- 
tions, it is to be wished that confession or absolution 
might by no means be suii'ered to fall into disuse in 
the Church, especially on account of bruised and ten- 
der consciences, as also on account of the ignorant 
youths, in order that they may be examined and 
instructed in the doctrines and duties of the Christian 
religion."* The Confessors teach on this subject, how- 



* Among the religious dogmas in the Book of Concord, auricular 
confession bears the rank and sijcnificance of a sacrament. In this 



TEE LORD'S SUPPER. 163 

ever, that " it is not necessary, in private or auricular 
confession, to enumerate all our sins or misdeeds, 
inasmuch as such an attempt would be, at any rate, 
impossible, .Psalm xix, 12: 'Who can understand his 
errors ? Cleanse thou me from secret faults.' " 

The German Evangelical Lutheran Ministerium of 
Pennsylvania and Adjacent States, has very materially 
modified and improved the dogma of auricular confes- 
sion, both in regard to its form and import, and given 
it an air and expression more adapted to the advanced 
intelligence and liberal Christian views of the present 
age. The " General Synod of the Evangelical Lu- 
theran Church in the United States of America," I 
may remark, in passing, has long since impressed upon 
this institution the more marked insignia of an evan- 
gelical character. 

In the Lord's Supper, the doctrine of the bodily 
presence of Christ in, iviiJi, and under the sacramental 
bread and wine, is taught, believed, and — as far as 
feasible — carried out : this is consistency, and as such, 
at least, praiseworthy ; but the question recurs, Why 
are Luther and his coadjutors in the faith implicitly 
obeyed in one thing and not in another ? If private 
confession has become obsolete, and is thus no longer 

Hglit Luther clearly regarded it, without, however, an espress de- 
claration to that effect. In his opinion, it is inseparably connected 
with the office of the keys, and, therefore, to be retained and held 
sacred. But it is Melanchthon who indubitably established this point, 
in the Apology of the Augsburg Confession, page 193, where he thus 
writes of this institution : "Hence the true sacraments of the Chris- 
tian Church are Baptism, the Lord's Supper, and Absolution." 



1G4 THE DOCTRINE OF 

an element in Christian discipline or appreciated as a 
means of grace, let it be erased from the list of the 
Church's confessions of faith ; and, above all, let sub- 
scription to it cease, and the reputation and efficiency 
of the Church be no longer impaired by the unjust 
imputation of Romish practices. 

It should be observed that confession of sin, as it is 
now recognized and practiced, is no longer private but 
public; not in the confessional and in the saintly ears 
of a priest or "Father Confessor," but in the house of 
God, and to God, agreeably to the *' Order of Service, 
Preparatory to the Lord's Supper," mentioned above, 
embodied in the Hymn Book of the "Evangelical Lu- 
theran Ministcrium of the State of New York," pub- 
lished in 1834. The pastor, now happily in the place 
of the priest, has nothing further to do than — after a 
public and general confession of sin by the congrega- 
tion — to announce the gracious purpose of God, for 
Christ's sake, to forgive the sins of all those who are 
truly penitent, and resolved henceforth to lead a sober, 
righteous, and godly life, through Jesus Christ our 
Lord. 

In the '■ Church Book" of the Miuisterium of Penn- 
sylvania it is stated, under the head of Confession, 
" That we receive absolution or forgiveness of sin 
through the pastor as of God himself," and this state- 
ment is strictly Lutheran, or in exact conformity with 
the Reformer's teaching upon this subject, in the 
Smaller Catechism; but in my humble opinion, it ever 
behooves frail humanity to bear in mind that nothing 
that they can do is " as of God himself," and that. 



TEE LORD'S SUPPER. 165 

therefore, God cannot have vouchsafed to it such plenary 
authority. Not even in the name of God should the 
office of the keys be executed, but simply and exclu- 
sively in virtue of the teachings of the Gospel of Christ. 
The*assumption to absolve or forgive sins 'Mike God 
himself," is based upon the power or office of the keys, 
Matthew, xvi. 19 ; John, xx. 23. Now, to whom was 
the power or office of the keys intrusted ? I answer, 
To the Apostles, and not to Christian ministers ; for 
these are neither Apostles nor the successors of the 
Apostles. The distinction between them is clear and 
decisive. In Ephesians, iv. 11, we read: "And he 
gave some apostles, and some pastors and teachers," 
etc. Christian ministers unite in their functions the 
offices of pastor and teacher, and, hence, they are min- 
isters and not Apostles. Their endowments, too, are very 
different from those of the Apostles : these ministers of 
Christ were inspired and wrought miracles. Is the min- 
ister gifted with such endowments ? If he is, let him show 
that he is inspired by proving himself to be infallible. 
Can he perform miracles, then let him '' raise the dead or 
cast out devils," etc., Matthew^ x. 8, and thus convince 
the world that he possesses the extraordinary power 
of the Apostles, or that his pretension to the exercise 
of the office of the keys is not a sham. Destitute of 
the supernatural gifts of the Apostles, the minister 
cannot forgive sins "hke God himself." In short, the 
minister is neither an Apostle, nor divinely gifted like 
an Apostle, and beside this, the power or office of the 
keys ceased forever when the apostolic mission itself 
ceased. I repeat, that they who claim to represent the 



1G6 THE DOCTRIXE OF 

Apostles in the administration of the office of the keys 
must demonstrate their apostolic authority by apostolic 
deeds like the following, to be entitled to credence : 
Matthew,' x. 5-8 ; Mark, vi. 13 ; Acts, ii. 43 ; iii. 7 ; v. 
12; ix. 3 4-41, etc. 

I shall here give a synopsis of the manner in which 
auricular confession is to be conducted, according to 
Luther's Smaller Catechism, as it appears in the Book 
of Concord, to enable the reader to compare it with 
the present form which the confession of sin has as- 
sumed. In the first place, the penitent is directed to 
address himself to the priest or " Father Confessor"; 
secondly, deferentially to request him to hear his con- 
fession ; and thirdly, humbh^ to beseech him to absolve 
him from his sins. The priest bids him to proceed 
in the confession, and the penitent begins to give an 
account of his diverse relations and conditions in life ; 
of his manifold and grievous sins, both in respect to 
the omission of duty and the commission of evil; 
adding that he is sorry on account of his shortcom- 
ings and transgressions, and therefore promises to 
amend his sinful ways ; humbly asking, in conclusion, 
the forgiveness of his sins, or, in other words, sacra- 
mental absolution. To this confession of sin and 
expression of deep humility the priest responds : "God 
1)0 merciful to thee, and strengthen and confirm thee in 
the faith, amen." In addition to this part of his func-- 
tion, the priest is thus to interrogate the penitent: 
"Dost thou indeed believe that my forgiveness is 
the same as God's forgiveness ?" " Yes, reverend 
father," responds the penitent, " I do ;" and the priest, 



THE LORD'S SUPPER. 161 

in reply to this assurance, again says: "As thou 
believest, so be it unto thee ; I absolve thee of thy 
sins in the nanie of the Father, and of the Son, and of 
the Holy Ghost, amen. Go in peace I"* 

I conclude by observing that the desuetude into 
which auricular confession has fallen in the Lutheran 
Church is ominous of the fate of all dogmas not rest- 
ing upon a Scripture basis: "Every plant," says the 
Saviour, " which my heavenly Father hath not planted, 
shall be rooted up": Matthew, xv. 13. 



CHAPTER III. 

The Mass, or the Roman Catholic Ritual Service of the Lord's 
Supper. 

To judge from some remarks in the Apology of 
the Augsburg Confession, Melanchthon appeared not 
unfavorably inclined to the idea that the word Mass 
is derived from the elliptic sentence, "Ite, missa est," 
— go, your sin is forgiven. It is, in short, the Romish 

-■■■ Rev. S. I. Mahoney, late a Capuchin friar in the convent of the 
Immaculate Conception at Rome, expresses himself in this wise, in 
his work entitled " Six Years in the Monasteries of Italy, and Two 
Years in the Islands of the Mediterranean and in Asia Minor" : "On 
auricular confession is founded the vulgar belief of the great power 
of priests. It is natural for the human mind to regard with a degree 
of veneration the person of one who, it is led to think, represents the 
person of Jesus Christ in his ministerial office, and who has the fac- 
ulty of forgiving or retaining the sins of the people," etc. 



108 1'IIJ^ DOCTRINE OF 

ritual observance in the celebration of the Lord's 
Supper, and, as such, is a sad and disgusting carica- 
ture of the Gospel institution bearing this venerable 
name. The bread alone is administered to the com- 
municant, but not before it has been converted, by 
the solemn act of consecration, into the body and 
blood, soul and divinity, of Christ, or, in other words, 
into Christ himself, as a sin-expiating Saviour, and 
offered on the altar as a sacrifice for the actual sins of 
mankind, by the talismanic maneuvres of the priest ; 
for, according to the Romish theology, Christ made 
expiation only for hereditary sin, and thus failing to 
make complete expiation, the Romish Church has gen- 
erously condescended to assume the phihinthropic task 
of completing the sacrifice by the miracle of tran- 
substantiation, and a constantly repeated immolation 
of Christ in the mass. 

In the twenty-fourth article of the Augsburg Confes- 
sion, the Confessors write: " \\q are unjustly accused 
of having abolished the mass. So far from this being 
the case, we may be allowed to state, without the 
charge of boasting, — for the fact is notorious, that we 
observe it with far more devoutness and solemnity than 
our adversaries: the people are instructed with great 
care and diligence in respect of the object of the insti- 
tution of the Holy Sacrament, and made to understand 
that it is especially designed to be used as the most 
approved and effectual means of healing and tranquil- 
izing their wounded and terrified consciences ; and 
tlius to induce them to attend mass and participate in 
the commuuion. Besides, we curefully [)oiut out and 



THE LORD'S SUPPER. 169 

correct the erroneous notions which generally prevail 
on the subject of the mass-ritual of the Sacrament. In 
the ritual observances of the mass we have not made 
any material change, except that in some places German 
hymns, in addition to the Latin, have been introduced, 
in order to enable us with more facility to instruct and 
improve the minds of the people, inasmuch as it should 
be the paramount object of all religious ceremonies 
to enlighten the minds of the worshipers, both as to 
their Christian faith and their solemn responsibili- 
ties," etc. 

If now we hear Melanchthon, in the Apology of the 
Augsburg Confession, we shall meet, of course, with a 
more or less thorough indorsement of the use of the 
mass, and still find it to occupy a prominent place in 
the creed of pristine Lutheranism. ''I observe by 
way of preface," he writes, "that we have not dis- 
carded the use of the mass, but that on every Sabbath 
and festival occasion it is celebrated in our churches, 
when the Lord's Supper is administered to all who 
desire it, provided they have first been to confession 
and received absolution. Christian exercises in read- 
ing, singing, and prayer, etc., likewise form part of 
the mass-service. We, however, no longer make use 
of private masses, but confine ourselves to such as are 
of general import, when it is customary for the people 
to commune, and this practice is not opposed to the 
commonly received custom on this subject," etc. 

Both in the Augsburg Confession and the Apology 
of that Confession, the Confessors severely condemn 
the Roman Catholic idea, that the mass has sacrificial 

15 



170 THE DOCTRINE OF 

or immolative virtue, and more than once declare 
that Christ alone — not the oblation or offering of a 
consecrated wafer of bread, is the true and only sin- 
offering, not only for hereditary, but for all actual sin. 
Owing to the manifold abuses which marred and dis- 
graced the mass-service or missal, Luther needed but 
time and reflection properly to recognize and abhor the 
papal institution, in all its various deformity and corrup- 
tion, and to denounce it as at once anti-scriptural and 
destructive to the best interests of the soul. Accord- 
ingly, in the Schmalkald Articles, just seven years 
after the presentation of the Augsburg Confession, he 
peremptorily rejected it as an institution entirely de- 
void of Divine authority, and therefore, though not 
without some redeeming traits, a mere human device, 
for which a scriptural, and hence a much better sub- 
stitute might be introduced. The fact is, the mass 
nourished and perpetuated the grossest superstition ; 
it had virtually become a brokers' institute, and, as 
such, a fruitful means of gulling the people and en- 
riching the priests. But let us hear the Reformer 
himself: "Let the people," says he, "be publicly 
taught that tlie mass — as a jmgeant of human inven- 
tion — may, without sin or detriment, be omitted; that 
none will be subjected to censure or inconvenience for 
neglecting it ; and that we may be saved without it in 
a manner not adverse to, but compatible with, the 
spirit and aim of Christianity. No doubt, by simply 
and steadily pursuing this prudent course, the mass — 
as it deserves, will soon fall into desuetude, not only 
among uneducated peo}>ie, but also among the intelli- 



THE LORD'S SUPPER. l-jl 

gent, the pious, Christian, and God-fearing part of the 
community. Especially will this be the case if they 
are told that it is an institution fraught with great peril 
to the soul, destitute of the sanction of God's word, 
and of purely human origination." He adds : ''Inas- 
much, therefore, as the institution of the mass is simply 
of human device, and includes among its originators 
great knaves, who sought to use it as a means of 
obtaining Divine mercy, and thus expiating their own 
sins; and as this and nothing else was the primary 
end for which the mass has been instituted, it merits 
the unreserved rejection and condemnation of the 
Christian." 

What the mass is in its fully-developed enormity 
and height of blasphemous pretensions, the follow- 
ing communications will demonstrate. In the work 
entitled ''A Synopsis of Dens' Moral Theology, Pre- 
pared for the Use of Romish Seminaries and Students 
of Theology," translated from the Latin by Doctor 
Berg, we read on page 414 what the canons of the 
Council of Trent decree concerning the sacrifice of the 
mass : "Whoever shall say that in the mass there is 
not offered to God a true and proper sacrifice, or that 
Christ's being offered is nothing else but his being 
given to us to be eaten, let him be accursed. Who- 
ever shall say that by these words. Do this in remem- 
brance of me, Christ did not appoint the Apostles as 
priests, or that he did not ordain that they and other 
priests should offer his body and blood, let him be 
accursed. Whoever shall say that the sacrifice of the 
mass is merely an offering of praise and thanks, or 



172 THE DOCTRINE OF 

a simple commemoration of the sacrifice performed 
on tlje cross, and not propitiatory; or that it is of 
benefit only to the recipient, and that it oug-ht not to 
be offered for the living and the dead, for sins, pen- 
ances, satisfactions, and other necessaries, let him be 
accursed," etc. 

The subjoined portraiture of this sinful and odious 
institution, by the author quoted on page 16Y, will serve 
to throw additional light upon its unreasonableness as 
well as unbiblical character and hurtful tendency. " The 
sacrament of the eucharist or last supper," says this 
writer, " is especially dwelt upon at unusual length, and 
propped by a host of arguments, — some taken from 
Scripture, others from tradition, others from revelations 
made by some departed saints to some monks in this 
world, and not a few, from miracles performed to give 
testimony of its institution in the sense in which it is 
understood by Roman Catholics. It is well known to 
every one — or if it is not, it should be known, in order 
to judge of the value of an anathema, that the Council 
of Trent anathematizes every one who will dare say 
that in the sacrament of the altar — thus the last sup- 
per is called, 'there is not really i)resent the body and 
blood of Christ.' Roman Catholics believe, therefore, 
that after the words of consecration — according to the 
missal or mass-ritual, ' hoc est corpus meum,' this is 
my body — pronounced by the priest, the whole sub- 
stance of the bread is changed into the body of Christ, 
and likewise, that the whole substance of the wine is 
changed into his blood after the consecrating words 
* liic est calix sanguinis mei,' etc., this is the cup of 



THE LORD'S SUPPER. HS 

my blood. It is evident that nothing can be more con- 
tradictory to Scripture or to common sense than this 
doctrine; the words 'this is my body,' 'this is my 
blood,' being mere figurative expressions, as any one 
may perceive who is not blinded by ignorance and 
superstition. Besides, such a transubstantiation — 
change of the bread and wine into the body and blood 
of Christ, is so opposite to the testimony of our senses, 
as completely to undermine the whole proof of all the 
miracles by which God has confirmed revelation. By 
it the same body is alive and dead at one and the same 
moment, and may be in a million different places, whole 
and entire, at the same instant of time ; while part of 
Christ's body is also made equal to the whole, etc. 

" On the belief, that the sacrament contains the real 
and very body and blood of Christ, is founded the sac- 
rifice of the mass, as it is styled, by which they — the 
priests, get their subsistence, and in which they offer 
Christ as a victim for the sins of the living and the 
dead. Although ' Ghrisf — if the Apostles were not 
mistaken — ' ivas once offered — without need to be 
offered again — to bear the sins of many,^ and though 
* we are sanctified through the offering of the body of 
Jesus Christ once for all,'' Hebrews, ix. 28, x. 10, 
yet he is sacrificed a hundred thousand times every 
day throughout the Roman Catholic world, and three 
hundred thousand times on the day held in commemo- 
ration of his birth : there being three masses celebrated 
by every priest on Christmas-day. This computation 
is made upon the supposition that there are but one 
hundred thousand popish priests in the world, whereas 
15* 



174 THE DOCTRINE OF 

there are probably double or treble that number. A 
hundred thousand Christs, therefore, are made every 
day as soon as the words of consecration are pro- 
nounced by the priests; and were it possible to divide 
each particle of the bread into a million separate parts, 
and transfer them to so many places apart, there would 
be present really and corporeally as many Christs as 
there are parts in the particle. A priest, therefore, in 
consecrating- a wafer, makes as many Gods as there are 
infinitely small parts into which a consecrated wafer 
can be divided ! Xo wonder, then, that men possessed 
of such extraordinary power, even that of making Him 
who made them, should be held in such veneration by 
all who believe in its reality. To nurture this belief, 
no devices, no ingenuity, are spared on their part. 
Being unabl-e to fix the foundation of the mass on 
Gospel grounds, they must have recourse to fables and 
lying wonders, to prodigies and miracles," etc. 

While I have thus endeavored to exhibit a true por- 
traiture of the Roman Catholic institutions known as 
the mass and auricular confession, the idea that in 
having done so I have vindicated the Lutheran Church 
of this country, at least, against the unjust imputation 
of manifesting popish tendencies, in respect to these 
extinct articles of faith, gives me great pleasure. If the 
Lutheran Church, whose distinctive religious faith is 
more particularly found within the pages of the Book 
of Concord, will now resolve to repudiate the dogma 
of the Beal Presence, which offers so serious a barrier 
to free intercourse and mutual co-operation among the 
different branches of the Church responding to the 



THE LORD'S SUPPER. It5 

name of Luther, while, at the same time, it damages 
its own fair fame, in the judgment of a large and re- 
spectable portion of its fellow-citizens, it cannot fail to 
increase its prosperity, while it extends its reputation, 
and thus — as to numbers, efficiency, and usefulness, 
deservedly secure to it a rank in the religious world as 
enviable as it must be exalted ! 



no THE DOCTRINE OF 



SEGTIOIsr 2^1. 

THE DOCTRINE OF THE REAL PRESENCE, IN THE 
LORD'S SUPPER, WAS THE CAUSE OF SOME TROUBLE 
IN THE EARLY LUTHERAN CHURCH. THE SOURCE 
OF THIS TROUBLE— WANT OF RELIGIOUS TOLERA- 
TION. 



Religious toleration, in the era of the Reformation, 
was little understood, and seldom practiced. Con- 
ferences convoked, or interviews appointed, for the 
laudable purpose of reconciling conflicting views of 
faith, not unfrequently resulted in only widening the 
breach between the contending parties, whose passions, 
by such well-meant measures, were often only the more 
inflamed, while their prejudices grew more inveterate. 
In this there is nothing surprising or even remarkable; 
for, generally, one individual thinks he has as good a 
right to his convictions as another, though it must be 
conceded that the convictions of one person may be 
more reasonable, and, therefore, more tenable, than 
those of another. From the very nature of the human 
constitution, it is impossible for all men to think and 
act alike, and the only available means that suggests 
itself to the reflecting mind, to live in peace and har- 
mony, is to have it mutually understood that every 
one shall be freely allowed to believe as God gives him 
grace, without the risk of subjecting him to censure or 



THE LORD'S SUPPER. \^^ 

hostility from his neighbor. To realize this end — the 
paramount prerogative of man, distinctive human 
creeds, sanctioned^ and enforced by ecclesiastical au- 
thority, must be absolutely abolished, and the Bible 
alone adopted as common ground of faith and bond of 
fellowship. This is the recognized Protestant and only 
true principle of Christian brotherhood ; but, alas ! in 
practice it has never, or but in embryo, except in 
apostolic times, been carried out : this the wide extent 
and sadly disintegrated state of religious partyism 
clearly demonstrates, as it everywhere among us most 
forcibly attests the impotence and futility of its agency 
under existing circumstances, mainly the result of 
spiritual pride and sinful egotism. 

'' The leading principle of the Reformation," writes 
Doctor Haweis, the ecclesiastical historian, '' that the 
Bible alone contains the religion of Protestants, which 
every man is to read and consider, and thence alone to 
draw all the articles of his faith and practice ; and that 
nothing is binding upon the conscience but what is 
there clearly revealed, or necessarily deducible from 
the Scripture declarations. These are generally ad- 
mitted principles ; but the Protestant Churches have 
severally differed in the application of some of them, 
and manifested a most blamable bigotry and severity 
towards their brethren in enforcing their own inter- 
pretations of the Scriptures ; and that, oftentimes, ac- 
cording to their own acknowledgments, in matters not 
essential to salvation."* 

-■• Doctor Haweis, having commented with much, just severity on 
priestly intolerance and presumption, thus concludes : "Ye followers 



178 THE DOCTRINE OF 

This precious Protestant principle, recognizing the 
Bible as the only directorial authority — the norma 
normans,m matters of faith and life, and, therefore, 
granting to all alike the privilege of appealing to it in 
the last instance — Luther fully admitted, though he 
seems to have laid more stress upon human authority 
in the later, than in the earlier period of his reform- 
atory career. " When, at the Diet at Worms, the 
Chancellor of Treves, spokesman of the Diet, said 
angrily to Luther," writes D'Aubigne, **You have not 
given any answer to the inquiry put to you : you are 
not to question the decisions of the Councils, you are 
required to return a clear and distinct answer; will 
you, or will you not retract ? Luther then answered, 
unhesitatingly, Since your most Serene Majesty and 
your High Mightinesses require of me a simple, clear, 
and direct answer, I will give one, and it is this: I 
cannot submit my faith either to the Pope or to the 
Councils, because it is as clear as noonday that they 
have often fallen into error, and even into glaring 
inconsistency with themselves. If, then, I am not con- 
vinced by proof from Holy Scripture, or by cogent 
reasons ; if I am not satisfied by the very texts that 
I have cited ; and if my judgment is not in this way 
brought into subjection to God's word, I neither can 
nor will retract anything; for it cannot be right fgr 
a Ciiristian to speak against his conscience. Then 
turning a look on that assembly before which he stood, 

of tlio meek and lowly Jesus, mark the man that hates and injures 
his brother for his opinions : ho is a murderer, in whatever church 
ho is found 1" 



THE LORD'S SUFFER. 1*79 

and which held in its hands his life or death, he said : 
I stand here and can say no more ; God help me I 
Ameu." 

This was, without doubt, the most sublime and 
manly pleading in behalf of liberty of conscience, as 
well as the most noble and undaunted appeal to the 
Bible, as the only normative religious authority, ever 
attempted by man. But did the heroic Reformer 
undeviatingly practice these exalted Christian princi- 
ples, thus fearlessly and admirably asserted in the 
presence of this august assembly, distinguished no 
less for its learning and power than for the splendor 
and magnificence of its rank ? Not always. In this, 
however, he was far from being singular ; for — with 
perhaps few exceptions, his zealous coadjutors in 
the laudable work of the Reformation were as ready 
to refer to the Bible, as the source and index of our 
faith, as their illustrious leader, while, like him, they 
sometimes set up mere human opinions as the ultimate 
standard of truth, thus reversing in practice what in 
theory they abhorred and condemned. A few, among 
many instances, will justify the assertion. 

The doctrine of the Real Presence in the Lord's 
Supper gave the first impulse to the spirit of discord 
and resistance among the Reformers, and proved to be 
one of the main causes of the schism which still dis- 
tracts the Protestant Church.* The literal interpre- 
tation of the words of the Lord's Supper, This is my 

-•'" The Calvinistic view of the Lord's Supper tends to schism no 
less than the dogma of the Ileal Presence ; for its basis is as little 
scriptural, while its import is no less uuinte!ii;^ible. 



ISO THE DOCTRINE OF 

body; this is my blood, could not but prove a stumli- 
ling-block to all who, iu conformity to a universally 
admitted mode of speech and the dictates of unbiased 
reason, recognized a metaphor in these expressions. 
The Literalists had an undoubted right to their opin- 
ions, but they had, by no means, an undoubted right 
to attempt to impose it upon others, or to refuse Chris- 
tian fellowship with those that entertained different 
views. The Bible, theoretically so justly honored and 
extolled, was, in a great measure, supplanted by the 
authority of human dogmas, and, instead of resorting 
to the former to explain and define the latter, these 
were, on the contrary, employed as the proper and 
only lawful means to unfold and ultimately determine 
the sense of the Bible. Intolerance was the necessary 
accompaniment or speedy consequence of such contra- 
dictory measures, and the persecutions, the abuses, and 
heart-burnings, which now and then marked the pro- 
gress and cast its Upas shadow upon the pretensions 
of the Reformation, were neither very few nor always 
very light. 

The unhappy dispute between Luther and Carl- 
stadt, concerning the Ileal Presence of the body and 
blood of Christ in the Eucharist, was the sad cause of 
the violent rupture which — to the disgrace of nascent 
Protestantism, ended in the banishment of the latter, 
instigated, it is affirmed, by his distinguished antago- 
nist, from the Electorate of Saxony. The words of 
Haweis, in relation to this affair, are: *' I have before 
spoken of Luther's harsh treatment of Carlstadt, 
whom his interest wilh the Elector drove from his 



THE LORD'S SUFPER. 181 

native land ; and whatever was pretended as the cause, 
the real one may be found in their disputes about the 
Eucharist." 

Schwenkfeldt, a Silesian knight and counselor to 
the Duke of Lignitz, a man of eminent learning and 
unblemished morals, animated by sentiments simi- 
lar to those of Carlstadt, had, it seems, the misfor- 
tune or the courage to differ from the great Reformer 
about some. of the rites and doctrines which the latter 
had introduced into the Church, and especially about 
the tenet of the Real Presence, and likewise fell a vic- 
tim to the same intolerant spirit, as appears from 
Mosheim, who thus summarily states the facts in the 
case : " This nobleman," writes the historian, *' sec- 
onded by Valentine Crantwold, a man of eminent 
learning, who lived at the court of the prince now 
mentioned, the Duke of Lignitz, — took notice of many 
things which he looked upon as erroneous and defective 
in the opinions and rites established by Luther ; and, 
had not the latter been extremely vigilant, as well as 
vigorously supported by his friends and adherents, 
would undoubtedly have brought about a consider- 
able schism in the Church. Every circumstance in 
Schwenkfeldt's conduct and appearance was adapted to 
give him credit and influence. His morals were pure, 
and his life, in all respects, exemplary. His exhorta- 
tions in favor of true and solid piety were warm and 
persuasive, and his principal zeal was employed in pro- 
moting it among the people. By this means he gained 
the esteem and friendship of many learned and pious 
men, both in the Lutheran and Helvetic Churches, who 

16 



182 TUE DOCTRINE OF 

favored his sentiments, and undertook to defend him 
against all his adversaries. Notwithstanding all this, 
he was banished by his sovereign, both from the court 
and from his country, in the year 1528, only because 
Zwingle had approved of his opinions concerning the 
Eucharist, and declared ' that they did not differ essen- 
tially from his own,'" etc. 

At this critical stage of ecclesiastical affairs in the 
Lutheran Church, the Crypto- Calmnisiic troubles, 
which had, for some time, lain smouldering under the 
embers of persecution, broke out anew with great vio- 
lence, and soon embraced a wide extent of territory. 
The fastnesses of the rigid Lutherans — the Olympus 
of the Amsdorffs, the Flacians, the Andreaeaus, etc. — 
were menaced with an attack from the puissant Titans 
that appeared amid the lurid scenes of strife. With 
the growth and apparent danger of the Calvinistic 
leaven, the cruel spirit of intolerance became corre- 
spondingly more wary and relentless, and it, accord- 
ingly, put forth redoubled vigor for the impending con- 
test. Anxiously concerned for the orthodoxy of the 
Church, "The Elector of Saxony," writes Mosheim, 
" convened anew the Saxon doctors, and held, in the 
year 1574, the famous convention of Torgau, where, 
after a strict inquiry into the doctrines of those who, 
from their secret attachment to the sentiments of the 
Swiss divines, were called Crypto-Calvinists, he com- 
mitted some of them to prison, sent others into ban- 
ishment, and engaged a certain number, by the force 
of the secular arm, to change their sentiments. Peucer, 
\v lio had been principally concerned in moderating the 



THE LORD'S SUPPER. 183 

rigor of some of Luther's doctrines, felt, in a more 
especial manner, the dreadful effects of the Elector's 
severity. For he-was confined to a hard prison, where 
he lay in the most affecting circumstances of distress 
until the year 1585, when he obtained his liberty," etc. 
Such conduct is suggestive of the warning in one of 
the stanzas of Pope's '' Universal Prayer" : 

" Let not this weak, unknowing hand 
Presume thy bolts to throw, 
And deal damnation round the land 
On each I judge thy foe." 

Peucer, according to Haweis, was son-in-law of 
Melanchthon, and a man distinguished both for his 
learning and piety. He was Professor at Wittenberg, 
and had formed a considerable party among the Saxon 
divines, who adopted with him the sentiments of 
Zwinglius respecting the Lord's Supper, which, it may 
be observed, Melanchthon, in his later years, likewise 
embraced. Ten long and tedious years did the unjustly 
maligned and oppressed disciple of Christ suffer the 
severe hardships of imprisonment on account of his 
opinions, or, in other words, for conscience sake, 
while the cruel treatment which he received bore evi- 
dence that persecution, on account of religious senti- 
ments, is not altogether confined to the pale of blood- 
stained popery. 

At last, to put an end, as was fondly hoped, to the 
conflicting views which agitated and seemed even to 
threaten the existence of the Church, and to secure as 
great a degree of uniformity in faith and practice as it 



184 THE DOCTRINE OF 

was possible, the famous Fo7'm of Concord was com- 
posed, in order to strengthen some of the weaker points 
in the Lutheran creed ; to elucidate and define others 
with more care and precision ; to give a more positive 
shape and expression to its dogmas generally; and, 
finally, by declaring it to be the inviolable standard of 
true faith, to impress it with the indelible insignia of 
perpetuity. Thus rigid Lutheranism — as it was 
termed — was, at length, clearly set forth and firmly 
established; and according to i\\\Q formula of faith, 
thus contained and explained in the Book of Concord, 
" doctrines," as it is stated in the Introduction, "shall 
be adjudged, and whatever is contrary to the express 
declarations set forth in it, shall be rejected and con- 
demned." 

The terse and pertinent remarks of Scott on this 
subject, in his work entitled " Luther and the Lutheran 
Keformation," deserve to be here appended : " The 
great principle, that to God alone, and not to his fel- 
low-creatures, is a man accountable for his religious 
belief; and that, so long as he conducts himself as a 
peaceable subject, — c?7/2<'/?,— he is entitled to the full 
protection of the magistrate, — a principle the very op- 
posite of that which had been received and acted upon 
during the long reign of popery, was yet scarcely dis- 
covered by here and there a scattered individual: and 
almost ages more elapsed before it was to any con- 
siderable extent proclaimed and admitted. 

" It could not be expected that either governments or 
individuals should, in the age of the Reformation, 
speedily divest themselves of the system of persecution 



THE LORD'S SUPPER. 135 

which flowed from the maxims of so many preceding 
ages, and still retained its hold upon the mind, even 
after the original -error on which it was founded had 
been detected and renounced. They were incapable of 
at once tracing to its just consequences the discovery 
which they themselves had made. If other professedly 
Cliristian bodies, not Roman Catholics, long retained 
the persecuting spirit, it was mainly because they found 
it so difficult wholly to eradicate the seeds of in- 
struction which they had received from the hand of 
popery," etc. 

Calvinism, too, — -likewise still, more or less, under 
pre-Reformation influence, — -can, by no means, boast 
exemption from acts of intolerance, as I shall briefly 
demonstrate.* 

* Servetus, a Spanish physician, a man of versatile genius, exten- 
sive learning, and, as far as could be judged, of sincere piety, who 
could boast the friendship of many persons of rank and influence in 
France, Germany, and Italy, aroused the spirit of persecution against 
himself on account of his denial of the Divinity of the Saviour ; and 
passing through Switzerland, in order to seek refuge against the im- 
pending storm, in Italy, his career was suddenly arrested by the vigi- 
lance and severity of Calvin, " who," writes Mosheim, " caused him 
to be apprehended at Geneva, in the year 1553, and had an accusa- 
tion of blasphemy brought against him before the Council. The 
issue of this accusation was fatal to Servetus, who, adhering reso- 
lutely to the opinions he had embraced, was, by a public sentence of 
the court, declared an obstinate heretic, and, in consequence thereof, 
condemned to the flames," etc. Whether the dogma of the Mystical 
Presence of Christ in the Lord's Supper had anything to do with 
this cruel deed it is hard to say, but it is certain it did at least not 
prevent it. 

In his " Geschichto dcs Abfalls der vereinigten Niederlande von 
dor Spanischen Regierung," that is, in his History of the Revolt of 

16* 



186 THE DOCTRINE OF 

the Uiiitcil Provinces of the Netherlands from the Spanish Govern- 
ment, Schiller writes: "The cruel oppression of the Catholics, in 
those places where the Calvinists had the upper hand, at length 
dispelled the existing delusion of the former, and induced them to 
withhold their support from a party of whoso conduct, should they 
continue in the ascendant, they had reason to apprehend results 
detrimental to themselves." 

I pass on to the Church of England, whoso creed is Calvinistic, and 
briefly call attention to the following facts, taken from Buck's "Theo- 
logical Dictionary." Having animadverted on the cruel persecutions 
of the Catholics in England, he adds: "Nor was the reign of Eliza- 
beth free from this persecuting spirit of tho Catholics. If any ono 
refused to consent to the least ceremony in worship, ho was cast into 
prison, where many of the most excellent men in the land perished. 
Two Protestant Anabaptists were burned, »nd many banished. Sho 
also, it is said, put two Brownists to death; and though her whole 
reign was distinguished for its political prosperity, yet it is evident 
that sW did not understand the rights of conscience ; for it is said 
that more sanguinary laws were made in her reign than in any of 
her predecessors-, and her hands were stained with tho blood both 
of Papists and Puritans. James the First succeeded Elizabeth ; ho 
published a proclamation commanding all Protestants to conform 
strictly, and without any exception, to all the rites and ceremonies of 
the Church of England. Above five hundred clergymen were imme- 
diately silenced, or degraded, for not complying. Some were excom- 
municated, and some banished tho country. Tho Dissenters were 
distressed, censured, and fined, in tho Star-chamber. Two persons 
wore burned for heresy,— one at Smithfield, and tho other at Lichfield. 
Worn out with endless vexations and unceasing persecutions, many 
retired into Holland, and from thence to America. It is witnessed by 
a judicious historian that, in this and some following reigns, twenty- 
two thousand persons were banished from England by persecution to 
America." 

I shall omit in this hasty sketch a notice of tho dark and bloody 
scenes enacted in the reign of Charles the First, chiefly at the insti- 
gation of the jicrsecHtinfj Laud, a veritable demon in holij ordem, and 
observe that the Presbyterians, when circumstances favored op- 
pression, did not altogether refuse to avail themselves of them. 
"Tho Presbyterians," writes Buck, "when their government came 



THE LORD'S SUPPER. 18*7 

to be established io England, were not free from the charge of per-j, 
secution. In 1645 an ordinance was published, subjecting all who 
preached or wrote against the Presbyterian directory for public wor- 
ship to a fine not exceeding fifty pounds; and imprisonment for a 
year, for the third ofi"ence, in using the Episcopal book of common 
prayer, even in a private family. In the following year the Pres- 
byterians applied to Parliament, pressing them to enforce uniformity 
in religion, and to extirpate popery, prelacy, heresy, schism, etc. ; 
but their petition was rejected," etc. 

I might here point out in detail, and show by numerous examples, 
the difference between Christians professing perfectible creeds and 
those adhering to unalterable confessions of faith. But a concise 
statement of facts will suffice. The Plymouth colony, in Massachu- 
setts, professed, as pupils of Robinson, a creed of the former kind; 
the colony of Massachusetts Bay, preponderatingly Calvinistic, one 
of the latter. The consequence of such diversity of views manifested 
itself in the ecclesiastical policy of the two embryo commonwealths: 
the Plymouth people were animated by a spirit of long-suffering and 
toleration, while those of Massachusetts Bay were dogmatic in their 
opinions and arbitrary in their religious government. It seemed a3 
if Moses reigned in the "one place, in the thunders of Sinai, Christ 
in the other, through his own "exceeding riches of grace." Here was 
more of the Bible, there more of man's device. Hence the striking 
result !* 

Persecution, I may observe, is natural where unalterable creeds 
prevail, and high mental culture only, thoroughly imbued with the 
spirit of Christ, will foster principles of toleration and stay the hand 
of the persecutor. As soon as a religious association has attained 
the conviction that it has the true faith, and which is, therefore, in- 

* Treating of the Puritans, Buck observes : " Those who formed the colony 
of Massachusetts Bay, liaving never relinquished the principles of a natioual 
church, and of the power of the civil magistrate in matters of faith and 
worship, were less tolerant than those who settled at New Plymou th, at Rhode 
Island, and at Providence. The very men, and they were good men too, who 
had just escaped the persecutions of the English prelates, now, in their turn, 
persecuted others who dissented from them, till at length the liberal system 
of toleration, established in the parent country at the Revolution, extending 
to the colonies, in a good measure put an end to these proceedings." See 
also Biblical Repository and Quarterly Observer of April, 1835. 



188 THE DOCTRINE OF 

.suscoptiblo of improvement, so soon it harbors a spirit of intolerance ; 
for all tbat differ from it are, of course, in error and unfit religious 
companions : in fact, they are hold to bo churchly unclean. They aro 
looked upon as standing in an inimical relation to God, not having 
been divinely inspired as have been their amiable judges, and on 
whom, therefore, the heavenly Father cannot smile, because they 
have not — without their fault, it should seem — the true doctrine, — that 
is, do not believe like their Shibboleth brethren. Such being the case, 
the inference is, — it is the bigot's inference, — that they have no business 
to cumber the ground, but, like weeds among the wheat, must be pulled 
up and cast out. Saints and sinners, what fellowship can they have ? 
Yet it may bo the latter aro God-fearing, while the former, with 
complaisant mien and sluggard souls, arc content with the lip-servico 
of a ritualistic "Lord, Lord \" 

Alas, under similar circumstances, there are few men that would not 
light the diabolical torch of persecution ! Instead, therefore, of con- 
demning such religious aberration of a past age as evidence simply 
of extreme baseness of character, we should thank God for the supe- 
rior biblical aud scientiQc light which illumines the nineteenth cen- 
tury; and whiie we deplore the wrongs and sufferings which an 
intolerant spirit, incidental, it is to bo hoped, onljr to former ages, 
has inflicted upon mankind for opinion's sake, let us cast the broad 
mantle of Christian charily over the grim record of tho bloody scene. 



TEE LORD'S SUPPER, 189 



SIElCTIOIsr XIXI. 

TEE APPEAL IN BEEALF OF TEE BIBLE AND OF OUR 
CO UNTR Y. 



God, my fellow-citizens, speaks to us in the Bible, 
and should we not hear him ? Should we not hasten to 
learn of him what is his will, and in what consists owr 
duty ? Where the Bible is, there is light : we are 
God-taught, and free to worship according to the dic- 
tates of our consciences ; where it is not, there is 
spiritual darkness, and its inevitable consequence,— 
hierarchical tyranny. These truths are well understood 
and appreciated by the Catholic Church of this coun- 
try. Hence, to acquire absolute dominion over you, 
they use every means in their power to banish the 
Bible from our common schools, and, having succeeded, 
it will soon be ejected from our homes and our altars. 
Can you contemplate with sinful indifference this foul 
attempt to rob you of the God-given treasure — the 
Bible, and then, thus robbed, pass into the spiritual 
slavery of papal despotism, more to be deprecated than 
war, famine, or pestilence? Arouse yourselves, my 
countrymen, and when the time comes — and it will not 
be either long or slow in coming — that shall " try men's 
souls", and decide the future destiny of the Republic, 
take your stand with the souls of Christian heroes on 



190 THE DOCTRINE OF 

Bible ground, — it is holy ground, — and let your sacred 
battle-cry be, Liberty or Death I Do you, now and 
then, call to mind, my fellow-citizens, that you possess 
a country unsurpassed in material resources, in the 
grandeur and variety of its scenery, and especially in 
its free and noble institutions, the pride of the nation, 
the gift of God and of the illustrious heroes of the Amer- 
ican Revolution, — our slavery-hating, freedom-loving, 
our thrice great and glorious ancestors? Ah, what 
hardships did they not endure, what blood and treas- 
ure did they not expend, in the sacred cause-of civil 
and religious liberty I Look around the wide world : 
" taken for all in all," you will not find a country so 
blessed, so distinguished. for all the elements necessary 
to exalt a nation, — to make it great and happy. While 
you pray to the Giver of all good gifts that you may 
ever have a Bible, — open and free to all, as well as the 
touchstone of the faith of all, — pray also often and fer- 
vently for your country, that it may always be independ- 
ent, always free, always prosperous. Take heed, I 
beseech you, that political demagogues do not tamper 
with your civil rights, or Jesuits, by their insidious arts, 
undermine the nation's holy institutions, amid which 
the Htar-npan(jled Banner still waves " over the land of 
the free and the home of the brave." Sing too of 
your country; let the individual, let the family, let the 
nation join, in one universal chorus of freedom-inspired, 
freedom-defending patriots, in chanting the national 
anthem of freedom, — the death-song to tyrants, the pean 
of the free-born. Uark, they sing — God bless them : 



THE LORD'S SUPPER. 191 

" My country^ 'tis of thee, 
Sweet land of liberty, 

Of thco I sing ; 
Land where my fathers died. 
Land of the Pilgrims' pride. 
From every mountain's side 

Let freedom ring. 

"My native country ! thee, 
Land of the noble free. 

Thy name I love; 
I love thy rocks and rills. 
Thy woods and templed hills; 
My heart with rapture thrills 
Like that above. 

^'Let music swell the breeze, 
And ring from all the trees, 

Sweet freedom's song ; 
Let mortal tongues awake. 
Let all that breathe partake ; 
Let rocks their silence break. 
The sound prolong. 

" Our fathers' God ! to thee. 
Author of liberty ! 

To thee we sing ; 
Long may our land be bright 
With freedom's holy light ; 
Protect us.by thy might. 

Great God our King !" Amen. 



THE END. 



